[8:05] All right, good morning. We'll uh call

[8:07] this Friday, June 6, 2025 joint school

[8:10] board and Anchorage assembly meeting to

[8:13] order. It is 10:07 here in the ASD

[8:17] boardroom. We'll call We've called

[8:19] ourselves to order. We'll conducting a

[8:20] roll call at this point. Miss Sullivan,

[8:22] could you call the role for the ASD

[8:23] school board?

[8:28] President Jacobs. Present. Member

[8:31] Bellamy. Present. Member Hollerman.

[8:34] Present. Member Donley.

[8:37] Here. Member Higgins.

[8:40] Member Lessons.

[8:42] Here. Member Wilson.

[8:46] Chair. We have a quorum. Thank you, Miss

[8:49] Sullivan. Vice Chair Broly.

[8:51] Thank you. Um, Miss Acres, will you call

[8:53] the role for members?

[8:56] Member Baldwin Day, present. Vice Chair

[8:59] Broly

[9:00] here. It's my understanding that Chair

[9:02] Constant is excused. Yes, that's

[9:04] correct. Member Girker

[9:07] here. Member Johnson here. Member

[9:10] Martinez present. Member McCormack here.

[9:13] Member Meyers.

[9:16] Member Perez Verdilla.

[9:19] Member Rivera present. Member

[9:27] Silvers, she is on YouTube or on

[9:30] Zoom. Member

[9:35] Voland chair, you have a quorum. Thank

[9:38] you.

[9:40] Okay. Um, Vice President Bellamy, would

[9:42] you please lead us in the flag salute?

[9:52] To the republic for it stands, one

[9:55] nation under God, indivisible, with

[9:58] liberty and justice for all.

[10:04] Member Martinez, would you please read

[10:06] the land acknowledgement?

[10:08] We acknowledge that we gather here today

[10:10] on the traditional lands of the Denina

[10:12] people of the Upper Cook Inlet. For

[10:14] thousands of years, the Dina people have

[10:17] been and continue to be the stewards of

[10:19] this land. ASD is committed to diversity

[10:22] and inclusion. It is with honor and

[10:26] respect that we recognize all indigenous

[10:28] people who live and learn in our

[10:30] community.

[10:33] Thank you, sir. All right. Moving on to

[10:35] minutes of a previous joint meeting.

[10:37] Members from both bodies have in front

[10:39] of them our March 7, 2024 meeting

[10:41] minutes.

[10:43] It should be 25. Thank you, Vice Chair

[10:45] Broly. Um, so we'll correct that in our

[10:47] agenda. Please take a moment to read

[10:49] those and we can note any corrections

[10:51] before we uh move to approve.

[11:02] And I will move to approve the March 7,

[11:04] 2025 minutes.

[11:08] Is there any

[11:10] discussion?

[11:11] Hearing and seeing none, I'm asking for

[11:14] unanimous consent to approve the March

[11:15] 7th, 2025 meeting

[11:17] minutes. Hearing no opposition, those

[11:20] meeting minutes are approved. We're now

[11:21] at the approval of the agenda. We have

[11:23] an agenda in front of us. Uh is there a

[11:25] motion to approve the agenda as drafted?

[11:29] Move to approve.

[11:31] Second. Made by member Baldwin Day,

[11:34] second by member Lessons. Is there any

[11:36] discussion or amendments before we ask

[11:38] unanimous consent and approval?

[11:42] Okay, asking for unanimous consent to

[11:44] approve the agenda as

[11:46] drafted. Hearing no opposition, we have

[11:48] an agenda. Thank you,

[11:50] everyone. All right, first up is a

[11:53] public comment. We have one member of

[11:55] the public who has signed up today. Uh,

[11:57] Mr. William Baxter. I think we have a

[11:59] empty seat to my left. If you'd like to

[12:01] come up to the microphone and join our

[12:04] table, and you will have three minutes

[12:06] once you're seated and ready to speak.

[12:17] Welcome, sir.

[12:20] I'm William Baxter. I represent uh I

[12:22] volunteer for FFA and uh I uh a lot of

[12:26] times I've been speaking here like seven

[12:28] times I think and then I go over to the

[12:31] Miss PI on Tuesdays and I speak there

[12:34] and I also been speaking at uh Mass

[12:38] School District too on FFA and uh uh I

[12:43] don't really don't know what I'm doing

[12:44] but I just let you smart people figure

[12:46] it out. But anyway, um I uh but I have a

[12:51] burden for MFA and 4 and other things in

[12:54] the M like uh uh 4 and and where

[12:59] whatever else they can get get me into.

[13:02] I uh I go to uh do a lot of they have me

[13:05] do I do a lot of things that help to do

[13:09] it. Thank you.

[13:12] for your testimony. Thank you.

[13:16] All right. Before we be begin our um

[13:18] discussion items and business today, I

[13:19] just want to note a housekeeping items

[13:20] for members that um your microphones can

[13:22] act as you entering the queue because we

[13:24] should have you labeled on those. So,

[13:25] please feel free to to um sign up for

[13:27] the Q to speak, ask questions that way.

[13:29] With that said, we've completed item D,

[13:31] public comments. We'll move on to E,

[13:33] financial planning, uh budget ASD. Uh

[13:36] Dr. Brian, I believe you'll take lead on

[13:37] this. Thank you, President Jacobs. So,

[13:40] I'll go ahead and hand it off to our

[13:41] chief financial officer, Andy Ratliff.

[13:43] So, I I will say before he gets started

[13:45] that this topic is going to get pretty

[13:48] technical, pretty in the weeds, but I

[13:50] don't want the people in this room to

[13:51] forget that we had a very close call on

[13:53] Monday and there was a very high

[13:55] probability that right now today we

[13:57] would have been scrambling to find about

[13:59] $15 million. So, we're going to get

[14:01] through some technical stuff. I'm going

[14:02] to need a lot of your help to really

[14:04] understand this topic because we need to

[14:06] make a citywide effort to make sure that

[14:08] everybody understands what exactly is

[14:10] happening. Mr. Ratliff. All right, thank

[14:14] you. Um, so the first part of

[14:21] this first part of this presentation is

[14:23] going to look astonishingly similar to

[14:25] one I gave to the school board about a

[14:26] month ago for um based on some adbacks

[14:30] that these are still kind of in flux as

[14:32] well. So I wanted to touch on them

[14:33] again. Um, and then we gave that

[14:36] presentation again to the legislative

[14:38] committee for the assembly. So, a lot of

[14:40] you guys in this room have probably seen

[14:41] this, so I don't want to spend a lot of

[14:43] time on that, but I want to get some to

[14:45] some of the new stuff around uh the

[14:47] disparity test and change recommended

[14:49] changes to the local contributions

[14:50] limits. Um, in your packet, you have a

[14:53] copy of the presentation that I'm going

[14:54] to give as well as a couple other

[14:56] documents. Um, the second attachment in

[14:59] there is going to be the the

[15:02] determination from the state that this

[15:03] the local changes were an emergency or

[15:06] deemed an emergency and then what those

[15:08] changes were. And then the third

[15:09] document in there is going to be the the

[15:12] federal government's ruling on the

[15:13] disparity test for the state. So you'll

[15:16] have all those. You can read through

[15:17] them. The one from the federal

[15:18] government's kind of a hard read, but

[15:19] it's uh it's good information. Um we'll

[15:22] kind of try to make that a little more

[15:25] understandable as we go along.

[15:34] Uh so the the board presented a budget

[15:37] revision that included about a $560 BSA

[15:40] equivalent increase above what the state

[15:43] had in statute. Um this was based on

[15:45] HB57 passing out of the House and Senate

[15:48] with 48 out of 60 legislators voting in

[15:50] support. Um that bill increased the base

[15:53] student allocation by

[15:55] $700 and then had a 10% increase in

[15:58] transportation and then some CTE

[16:00] multipliers and other student

[16:02] proficiency incentives that were based

[16:04] on another bill passing. Um that's SB

[16:07] 113 which would be the digital tax or

[16:10] the tax on digital

[16:12] um uh vendors I guess. So, I'm not sure

[16:15] the status of that, but

[16:18] uh I thought it' been transmitted to the

[16:21] governor. So, we do anticipate getting

[16:23] some more money based on this. Uh the

[16:25] governor vetoed this bill originally and

[16:27] then it was voted to override. So, this

[16:30] still has a the governor will still have

[16:33] another veto opportunity on the

[16:34] operating budget to trim out education

[16:37] funding out of there if he so chooses.

[16:39] Um but that's not due back until the

[16:41] 19th of June.

[16:48] Um, so really the reasons that the board

[16:50] gave for increasing that was the

[16:52] governor's bill actually included a $560

[16:54] BSA increase. Um, onetime funding of

[16:58] $680 BSA was what we received this year.

[17:01] So really taking the calculated risk

[17:03] needed to help retain our staff and not

[17:05] have mass

[17:07] layoffs. What was added back was uh

[17:11] added we had it originally a plus4 ptr

[17:14] increase or class size increase for uh

[17:16] all grade levels. We were able to get

[17:18] that down to a plus one. So we still are

[17:20] increasing class sizes. Um reverse some

[17:23] of the cuts to holdbacks gifted adding

[17:26] our charter funding as well as some

[17:28] other items in here that the board chose

[17:30] to add back. about $30 million in

[17:32] instruct like direct instruction to our

[17:34] classrooms about 214 FTE were added back through this amendment. So

[17:39] this is really what kind of prevented us

[17:40] from having to do these mass

[17:43] layoffs. Additionally, restored

[17:46] librarians, nurses, uh some teaching

[17:48] experts and teaching learning for

[17:50] instruct or um interventions as well as

[17:53] some principles, library assistants and

[17:55] counselors. another 59 FTE just

[17:57] instructional support um for a total of

[18:00] about a little under 40

[18:03] million. We still do have a significant

[18:05] number of reductions in place even after

[18:07] adding those back including the 70 F 70

[18:11] FTE for the PTR adjustment of plus one

[18:14] or 57 FTE sorry and then a loss of

[18:17] enrollment adjustment. So as our

[18:19] enrollment went down we were able to

[18:21] reduce the number of staff needed to and

[18:23] keep the same class sizes. Um a few

[18:26] other things we're able to that we kept

[18:29] program based teachers hold back

[18:30] teachers were kind of an addition

[18:33] um but we're still reduced principles

[18:36] some librarians nurses and clerical due

[18:38] to uh the schools that we closed in Naka

[18:42] Valley and Lake Hood.

[18:46] You can read through the list of the

[18:47] reductions there for instruction. We

[18:49] also have some reductions still in place

[18:51] about 20 FTEE for special services. Uh

[18:55] by and large those are coming out of

[18:57] um mostly out between way and special

[19:00] elementary special education as we're

[19:02] trying to consolidate some

[19:04] classrooms. Additionally, another 30 FTE

[19:07] coming out of our admin pool or about 7

[19:10] and a half million including you know

[19:12] more folks from accounting, purchasing,

[19:14] HR. you know, we continue to have

[19:16] declines in those in those ranks. It

[19:20] then some of that the administrative

[19:22] added duty services, supplies, and

[19:24] equipment, that's depreciation to

[19:26] replace heavy equipment.

[19:29] Um, a lot of major maintenance funds,

[19:31] things like that that we we have to help

[19:33] support our schools, but those are still

[19:35] going to be going away under this

[19:36] proposal.

[19:37] Um just a sign of the times I

[19:41] guess really you know the risks and

[19:43] benefits if it's if the amount if some

[19:45] amount less than 560 BSA is allocated uh

[19:49] could result in hiring freezes, funding

[19:51] reductions and liquidated fund balance

[19:54] reserves

[19:56] uh that we already have in place for

[19:57] other other items. But it does allow for

[20:00] the placement of staff prior to the end

[20:01] of school and retaining educators. But

[20:03] this again, the governor can still veto

[20:05] those

[20:06] funds. Um, as far as the outlook goes

[20:09] for FY27 with this in place, you know,

[20:11] we still have a significant deficit as

[20:14] we are using about $50 million in fund

[20:17] balance to be able to to shore up this

[20:19] budget. So, kind of the the quick

[20:21] calculation on this is we take our

[20:23] expected revenue for FY27 or for 26 uh

[20:27] back out the one-time funding and then

[20:30] apply an inflationary factor to what

[20:31] we're planning on spending. So, after we

[20:34] back out the one-time funding, we're at

[20:35] about $585 million of ongoing revenue

[20:38] and about $653 million of ongoing um

[20:42] expenditures. Then we add a lot of

[20:44] delayed purchases for IT equipment such

[20:47] as Chromebooks and some of that fleet

[20:49] equipment too and curriculum instruction

[20:51] things like that that we need to that we

[20:54] can't delay forever essentially. So that

[20:56] gets to about a $75 million deficit that

[20:58] we're looking off looking at for FY27.

[21:02] So this conversation doesn't get fixed

[21:03] with HP57 p even passing the way it is.

[21:08] Um so there's a lot of things we don't

[21:10] know still. There's unsettled labor

[21:12] contracts, enrollment variances, uh

[21:14] tariffs, met medical costs, utility rate

[21:16] changes, things that are still kind of

[21:18] in play for next for FY27 that aren't

[21:21] really built into this projection as

[21:28] much. Clicking the wrong button here.

[21:31] Okay, so this is where we get into more

[21:33] of the new stuff that wasn't on the last

[21:35] presentation. So for those of you who

[21:38] saw the earlier version of this, um

[21:40] here's where we can start paying

[21:42] attention again, I guess.

[21:44] So So uh also included in the operating

[21:48] budget for the state was a 35 reduction

[21:50] 35% reduction of state bond debt

[21:52] reimbursement for any voter approved

[21:54] bond that was um approved prior to

[21:56] January of 2015. So we still have quite

[21:59] a few outstanding bonds that we're

[22:01] paying down from that time period um as

[22:04] we do 20-year bonds. So, this equates to

[22:05] about $4.5 million of funding that the

[22:08] state is not going to give us for next

[22:10] year that's going to have to be picked

[22:11] up by the Anchorage taxpayers. Um,

[22:14] typically we'll float that with our cash

[22:15] flow and our def our fund balance will

[22:17] go into a deficit in our debt service

[22:18] fund and then we'll request that back

[22:20] the following year since we've already

[22:22] made our tax request for this calendar

[22:25] year. Um, but that's just one of the

[22:28] unfortunate thing and the governor can

[22:29] still veto more funds from that line

[22:31] item as well through the operating

[22:33] budget. Any questions on the bond debt?

[22:36] This is something we went through for

[22:37] several years. Um, starting with

[22:39] Governor Walker. Um, we actually got

[22:42] that money back eventually and then now

[22:45] they're starting to cut it again. Um,

[22:47] just want to note for the record that

[22:48] member Silvers joined us at 10:17 and

[22:51] then if any members with a question

[22:52] would signify so by turning on their

[22:54] microphone, which will get you in the

[22:55] queue, that would be great. We've got

[22:58] Vice Chair Raleigh first. Thanks. Um,

[23:00] and thanks for the update on school bond

[23:02] debt reimbursement. So just to be clear,

[23:05] this says prior to 2015. So this is not

[23:09] um bonds that passed, you know, this

[23:11] year or any prior or prior year in the

[23:13] last 10 years. Is that right? Correct.

[23:15] So um back in as probably May of

[23:19] 2015, the legislature voted to put a

[23:22] moratorium on bond debt reimbursement

[23:24] for any new projects. They did

[23:26] retroactively apply that to January 1

[23:28] after we had actually passed a bond um

[23:31] in April.

[23:34] So still don't forgive them for

[23:37] that. But so but yeah, so it's anything past January 1st of 2015 never

[23:43] had bond debt reimbursement to begin

[23:44] with. So they had nothing to cut. Thank

[23:47] you. And then just a quick followup

[23:49] about uh how much uh bond debt is there

[23:53] from that time period because I know it drops off every year as we pay off

[23:56] bonds, but what is the kind of order of

[23:57] magnitude for um this what's left in

[24:00] this category?

[24:02] That is a good question that I don't

[24:04] know the answer to off the top of my

[24:06] head, but we can certainly get that to

[24:08] you. Yeah, a followup is fine. Thanks.

[24:10] Thank you. Um, member Johnson. Yeah, I

[24:13] think Vice Chair Broly kind of hinted at

[24:15] the question. Um, but I'm looking at the last line here. You said that the

[24:18] governor can still veto more funds if he

[24:20] chooses to do so. Do we have a sense of

[24:22] sort of what the the ceiling is on the

[24:24] potential impact to Anchorage taxpayers?

[24:27] I want to say it was

[24:29] like Jim, you don't

[24:32] It's like 18 million maybe.

[24:36] Would that be like 18 in total or 18

[24:38] above the four and a half? That's um in

[24:40] total. I think it was less than 20 in

[24:42] total. Okay.

[24:46] Well, I bet I don't have that in front

[24:48] of me either, but it was um because it's

[24:52] you know those bonds are getting older

[24:54] and phasing out. So, we have less of

[24:56] them to pay off now.

[24:58] Um, but we can get back with you on that

[25:01] too to make sure you guys have accurate

[25:02] numbers on that. But they could

[25:03] potentially veto all of it. Okay. Thank

[25:06] you.

[25:08] Uh, the kind of good news I guess would

[25:11] be that bond debt reimbursement for new

[25:13] propositions after July 1, 2025. Uh,

[25:15] we'll have a 40 to 50% reimbursement.

[25:18] The legislature did try to put through

[25:20] another moratorum that would extend this

[25:22] a new a few more years um but that never

[25:25] passed through. So, right now that goes

[25:27] back into effect. Um, again, those

[25:29] funds, if they do approve them, will be

[25:31] subject to appropriation and they can

[25:33] always put another moratorium back on

[25:35] when they come back into session in

[25:36] January. So, certainly not out of the

[25:38] weeds, but at this point in time, uh,

[25:41] after after July 1, 2025, new

[25:44] propositions would be eligible for some

[25:45] reimbursement. Quick question from

[25:48] member Brley. Yeah. So, I'm just doing

[25:50] the the timing math. Obviously, you

[25:52] know, even if they say they're going to

[25:53] reimburse and there's no money to do

[25:55] that, that's a challenge. Um, and then

[25:57] just a side note, if folks are wondering

[25:59] why are my property taxes going up for

[26:00] the next the last 10 years, this is part

[26:03] of that that we are full paying full

[26:04] cost for B. Anyway, my question is um so

[26:08] thinking about we or we um approve all

[26:11] bond funding by the end of January

[26:13] essentially for the April 2026 ballot.

[26:16] Um so I guess my question is I know it's

[26:18] speculative right now. Is ASD

[26:21] considering how is ASD factoring this

[26:24] into kind of what level of bond package

[26:25] that you would put forward? I know it's

[26:27] early um but if we're assuming that the

[26:29] legislature is going to put that

[26:31] moratorium back in place when they have

[26:32] the chance um that obviously impacts how

[26:35] much we would be paying. So I'm just

[26:36] curious if there's some early thinking

[26:37] on that.

[26:40] I have to I can answer that. We have a

[26:43] meeting next week to start discussing

[26:44] that and start running the numbers and

[26:47] uh how we might be looking at that.

[26:49] We've been trying to stick at under 65

[26:51] million. Um those bonds seem to have

[26:55] passed over the last many years and when

[26:58] you go over it it uh we have struggled.

[27:01] So uh we're we're going to go back and

[27:03] start working that next week. Um it'll

[27:06] be this fall that we'll go to the board

[27:07] for the first time with the new CIP and

[27:09] the bond request.

[27:11] I'll jump in from the board perspective

[27:13] just to add clarity that um I I don't

[27:15] think I've seen consensus from the

[27:17] legislature that there's the support to

[27:19] extend the school bond debt moratorum um

[27:21] which is reasonable frankly because um

[27:24] public education buildings are crumbling

[27:26] across our state.

[27:28] um the moratorum must end and we must

[27:31] find money to u begin investing in

[27:34] schools u from a capital perspective and

[27:37] so if there is an interest from the

[27:39] legislature in extending that moratorum

[27:40] I think we need pretty strong direction

[27:42] uh because frankly that investment is

[27:44] needed and so appreciate the question I

[27:46] think some of it's still to be

[27:48] determined and then I see member lessons

[27:49] in the queue thank you um I wanted to

[27:52] ask the administration to maybe just

[27:54] loosely elaborate on the scale of the

[27:57] backlog of maintenance. We have a great

[27:59] chart. It looks like this. And um what's

[28:03] the scale of our backlog at this point?

[28:07] Roughly can answer that. If you go back

[28:09] to 2012, we had about $170 million in

[28:13] debt. Um oh, I'm sorry. We had $170

[28:17] million in deferred maintenance and we

[28:20] had about $750 million in total bond

[28:23] debt. Um now we're well under 500

[28:26] million in total bond debt since then.

[28:29] Um but with the moratorium kicking in in

[28:32] 15 our deferred maintenance is now well

[28:35] over 1.4

[28:39] billion. And just as a quick followup

[28:42] and that that's everything from a major

[28:44] renovation at say Bartlett High School

[28:46] to

[28:47] fixing front doors that have been

[28:49] described as so stripped that you can't

[28:52] hang, you know, you can't hang them

[28:54] anymore. Correct. It's every major

[28:56] component of a building from windows and

[28:59] doors to heaters and boilers and roofs

[29:01] and everything else that have life

[29:03] cycles attached to them.

[29:06] um you know at some point the numbers so

[29:10] large that even if you had the money the

[29:12] there aren't enough people in Alaska and

[29:15] enough resources to actually do all of

[29:18] that maintenance.

[29:20] Um

[29:22] so you know I I don't know how you could

[29:25] tie it to an exact dollar amount because

[29:28] we haven't gone out for bids for that

[29:30] many projects. Um, but that's really

[29:32] tied to what it cost the day we put it

[29:34] in to replace the exact equivalent of

[29:38] that item. Um, and of course there's

[29:40] hundreds or thousands of those

[29:42] components within a high school that add

[29:45] up to the total dollar amount. Thank

[29:47] you, Member Lessons and Mr. Anderson. I

[29:49] see member Higgins in the queue. Yeah,

[29:51] I'll just mention that when we look at

[29:53] the deferred maintenance, of course, it

[29:54] varies as the type of maintenance and it

[29:56] varies by school, but when I went

[29:58] through Bartlett, which was recommended

[30:00] as the highest priority, I was shocked

[30:03] with the level of problems with roofs,

[30:05] with ventilation, with the with the

[30:07] heating system, uh, everything about it

[30:09] is so severe. Um, it's it's really

[30:12] shocking. The top floor, you got your

[30:14] buckets, you've got your cool, it's not

[30:17] hot during the summer, it's not warm.

[30:19] you go downstairs and you got

[30:21] temperature differences between one room

[30:22] and another uh which is dramatic

[30:25] temperature difference. So the the

[30:27] severity of the deferred maintenance for

[30:30] some schools is extreme and even some of

[30:32] our newer schools I saw had had to deal

[30:35] with buckets to do some roof repairs. Uh

[30:38] and I know that they can't do more than

[30:40] so many you know one roof a year or two

[30:42] roofs a year and it takes two years. So

[30:44] when you divide that up with 90

[30:46] something schools, you realize if if our

[30:48] roofs don't last 50 years, we're in

[30:50] trouble. And that doesn't allow for the

[30:53] time already that most of these roofs

[30:55] are so old. So we're so far behind from

[30:58] my perspective and looking at it that

[31:00] it's really um a scary situation that we

[31:03] can't ignore and just let keep growing.

[31:06] We've got to do something about it.

[31:10] Member Johnson. Yeah. Could you guys

[31:12] share that list of of uh deferred

[31:15] maintenance items?

[31:17] I'm getting a yes from our chief

[31:19] operating officer. Um and so we will get

[31:21] that to uh the both bodies. Great. Thank

[31:24] you. All right. Yeah. I would just like

[31:27] to clarify that's the things we know.

[31:30] Um you know there's there's no such

[31:33] thing as an absolute perfect list for 91

[31:36] buildings. We've cut maintenance by 25%

[31:40] um in the past decade plus. We're

[31:43] thousands of job orders behind. Um we

[31:46] cut it again for our next school year.

[31:49] Um, so please understand that what you

[31:51] will be looking at is a really, really

[31:54] long list, but there certainly are

[31:56] things that just broke this morning that

[31:58] wouldn't be on that list, and it

[31:59] wouldn't be inclusive of every job order

[32:02] that hasn't been looked at by

[32:04] maintenance yet to determine what might

[32:06] be wrong or what might be required to

[32:08] fix it. So, it's all in context. Um,

[32:12] it's it's a really long list. Thanks.

[32:18] All right. So, next section we're going

[32:20] to focus on the impact aid deduction.

[32:22] This is kind of what's been in the going

[32:24] around this week and changes local

[32:26] contribution. I do apologize for the

[32:29] wordiness of these slide the next few

[32:31] slides. Um, but I wanted to have on the

[32:33] record um just so someone comes reads

[32:36] this afterwards better understanding of

[32:38] how this impact aid uh how we why we

[32:41] received the money and how the deduction

[32:42] works. Um so the gist of it is some but

[32:46] not all districts receive federal impact

[32:48] aid funding from the federal government

[32:49] and that's due to having untaxable

[32:51] property in those districts. By and

[32:54] large it's military bases or tribal

[32:55] lands. It's kind of a payment in lie of

[32:57] taxes that the federal government offers

[32:59] since they own the land and don't pay

[33:01] property taxes to the districts. Uh the

[33:04] federal government allows the state to

[33:05] reduce state funding to districts that

[33:07] receive impact aid money if the state

[33:09] has equitable funding between districts.

[33:11] Essentially, it means the highest and

[33:13] lowest funded districts have to be

[33:15] funded within 25% each other um through

[33:18] a combination of state and local

[33:20] contributions. That's adjusted. There's

[33:22] like some weighted things that go into

[33:24] that or come out of it, I guess, like

[33:26] for, you know, there's an area cost

[33:28] differential between districts. So, it's

[33:30] more expensive to do business in Bethl

[33:32] than it is in Anchorage type thing. So

[33:33] they take those weights out of this

[33:35] calculation, but the gist of it is on a

[33:37] per student basis, they want to be

[33:39] within 25% to be comparable um and pass

[33:43] this what they call the disparity

[33:47] test. Each year the the federal

[33:49] government conducts this disparity test

[33:51] and that calculates our per student

[33:52] funding to ensure that the state and

[33:54] local uh funding to districts remains

[33:56] within that limitation.

[34:00] By passing the disparity test, the state

[34:02] can then reduce the amount of state

[34:03] funding to the districts by some

[34:04] percentage of the amount of impact aid

[34:06] received, which can be up to 90% of the

[34:09] eligible amount. There are a few

[34:11] carveouts for special education that we

[34:14] get impact aid money for um that come

[34:16] out of the total amount that the 90%

[34:18] applies to, but it's not a big

[34:20] percentage of it.

[34:22] um the 90% can go down if a local

[34:25] government uh if if they have a local

[34:27] government like REAS will get uh impact

[34:30] aid money too. So all the REAS have 90%

[34:33] of their impact aid taken by the state.

[34:36] Um but anyway that can be

[34:38] reduced a little bit if the local

[34:40] government spends more than the required

[34:42] minimum. Like for example, if Anchorage

[34:44] Assembly appropriated 200 million for

[34:47] education, but only a hundred of it was

[34:48] required, then the state's deduction

[34:51] would be 50%. So 100 million divided

[34:53] into the total that's given. Uh that's a

[34:56] little more nuanced than that because

[34:57] they take in some other local revenues,

[34:58] but that's really the gist of how this

[35:00] formula works and how that how the

[35:02] deduction works. Um in terms of dollars,

[35:04] Anchorage gets about $16 million a year

[35:07] for impact aid. Uh the state is planning

[35:09] on taking about six and a half million

[35:11] of that for next year as the reduction

[35:13] based on these formulas. Um so that's

[35:16] kind of the lay of the land of how the

[35:19] federal impact aid works or how we why

[35:21] we get the money. Um and then why the

[35:24] state reduces it. So on May 16th, the

[35:27] federal impact aid office notified the

[35:29] state that they failed the disparity

[35:31] test. Um, and why they failed it is the

[35:34] next bullet point because the state

[35:35] improperly excluded transfers between

[35:37] the local education agency's general

[35:39] fund and its special revenue fund for

[35:41] transportation and then improperly

[35:43] included transfers from the

[35:44] transportation fund back to the general

[35:46] fund as revenue. Um, so it was really

[35:49] based on this coding of transfers in

[35:53] inter fund transfers versus actual

[35:54] receipts from the municipality. Um I

[35:57] don't want it to be lost that had the

[35:59] state kept up with transportation

[36:01] funding or made it a reimburseable

[36:03] expense uh this they would have passed

[36:05] the disparity test. Um I think years and

[36:08] probably 15 or 20 years ago they used

[36:10] the program used to be reimburseable

[36:12] 100% reimburseable by the state for

[36:14] transportation. Uh in 201 I want to say

[36:18] 15 16 they made it as a per student

[36:20] amount based on those actual costs.

[36:23] inflation proof or I guess in 2012 maybe

[36:25] but then they inflation proofed it for

[36:27] three years and then since then it's

[36:28] been flat um uh costs have gone up

[36:32] considerably for transportation the

[36:34] minimum wage for transportation is ti or

[36:37] bus drivers is tied to two times the

[36:38] minimum wage so we have to pay like in

[36:41] 2016 1516 our minimum wage was $17.50 50

[36:45] or two times the minimum wage of$,750

[36:48] for next year that's going to go up to

[36:49] $26. So our costs continue to escalate

[36:52] uh really fast on transportation without

[36:55] any additional support from the state.

[36:58] But having to transfer money districts

[36:59] having to transfer money in and out

[37:01] between those two funds is what caused

[37:03] the disparity test

[37:05] failure. Uh there is a 60-day appeal

[37:08] period on federal impact aid for the for

[37:11] the failure of that. I don't believe the

[37:13] states filed anything yet with the feds,

[37:15] but they have indicated their intent to

[37:16] appeal the decision.

[37:21] Um, for the record, member Wilson just

[37:23] joined us online at 10:35. I see a few

[37:26] questions in the queue. We'll go to

[37:27] member Don Lee first. Andy, do we

[37:30] have the actual federal calculation that

[37:34] they came up with the

[37:36] conclusion of disparity stating the

[37:39] disparity? because it's always been a

[37:41] puzzle to me that we have a system where

[37:44] there's some school districts where per

[37:46] student they're getting five times as

[37:48] much as we are in Anchorage and the

[37:51] criteria is 25%. So that's like 20 times

[37:56] as much over the the 25% disparity

[38:00] target and yet they don't that seems to

[38:04] pass muster while this transmuting of

[38:07] transportation dollars didn't. Right.

[38:09] And that's taken and you're exactly

[38:12] right on that. But in within the

[38:14] disparity test calculations, they have

[38:16] these weighted amounts. So one of the

[38:19] weights that they calculate into is that

[38:21] district cost factor, which is one of

[38:23] the big reasons that school districts

[38:25] get considerably more like in some of

[38:28] those rural areas than we do um on an

[38:31] actual dollars per student. But once

[38:33] they remove those weights for the cost

[38:35] of living, the school size adjustment,

[38:38] those things, um that's really what

[38:41] factors into some districts having five

[38:43] times the revenue we do or per student

[38:46] anyway. So they they remove those

[38:48] weights as part of the calculation, I

[38:50] guess. Um but within the and I think

[38:54] you'd probably have to go look at the

[38:55] version the PDF that's online attached

[38:58] to the agenda. Um, within there there is

[39:00] a link to the spreadsheet that the feds

[39:02] used to calculate that out if you're

[39:04] interested in it. Um, and then the

[39:07] narrative on the PDF also kind of walks

[39:09] through how some of that's done.

[39:12] Thank you, member Donley. We'll go to

[39:14] member Baldwin Day.

[39:18] Thank you. Uh, would you repeat those

[39:20] numbers that you um that you mentioned

[39:23] for the FIA deduction for this year?

[39:26] Right. So we receive about 16 million in

[39:29] total from federal impact aid and the

[39:31] reduction is going to be about six and a

[39:32] half

[39:34] million maybe.

[39:37] Thank you. We'll go to member Johnson.

[39:42] Yeah, thank you. So you mentioned the district cost factor formula which

[39:45] as I understand it's been quite some

[39:47] time since the state has revised that

[39:49] and maybe it doesn't reflect reality.

[39:51] I'm seeing some nods but you said they they remove those waste. when they

[39:55] remove those waste, do they just take

[39:56] the district cost factor formula and

[39:58] sort of use that to sort of reverse

[40:01] engineer the funding or or are they

[40:03] looking at, you know, the actual

[40:05] disparities in in terms of the the real costs of between the districts,

[40:11] right? Because we're saying I I think

[40:12] it's been suggested that the real costs

[40:14] are not actually reflected in the

[40:16] district cost factor. Um I'm seeing more

[40:18] nods. So what is is that playing into

[40:22] this that that disparity there?

[40:26] No, they because they remove those those

[40:28] weights using the district cost factor,

[40:31] right? So like the Anchorage has a

[40:33] district cost factor of one. Um some

[40:36] districts have up to two. So they get,

[40:38] you know, 100 times more funding than we

[40:40] do on that district cost factor. So on a

[40:43] purely per student basis, they would get

[40:45] twice as much as us. But they, you know,

[40:48] they account for that. the cost of

[40:50] living in those communities are even

[40:52] though the data is 25 years old now they

[40:55] still fed still view that as valid.

[40:58] Okay. So that's that's that's not a

[41:01] factor or problem here.

[41:03] That's really not what covered. Thanks

[41:06] member lessons. I just wanted to um

[41:10] retrospectively say thank you to the

[41:12] assembly for your collaboration in

[41:14] passing the joint resolution back in

[41:16] early January on your side of things. Um

[41:19] there was a priority in that joint

[41:21] resolution about updating the district

[41:24] cost factor uh which is dates the data

[41:27] dates from 2000 to 2003.

[41:34] Yeah, this one's going to be hard to

[41:36] read, so hopefully you can see it on

[41:38] your PDF,

[41:39] but this is a potential scenario where

[41:43] the state had failed the disparity test

[41:45] and then prorates that lost because it's

[41:48] about an $81 million problem for the

[41:50] state to fail this test because they

[41:51] deduct $81 million or so from districts

[41:55] that receive in that's what that the

[41:57] deduction comes in. and it deducts it

[41:58] from state funding. Um, so if they short

[42:01] f if they do that and have to give that

[42:03] money back to all the districts but

[42:05] don't have that 81 million within the

[42:07] operating budget, then they're going to

[42:09] apply that most likely prorate that

[42:12] amount to all the

[42:14] districts. So on this one, you'll see

[42:18] for all the districts the adding back

[42:20] the federal impact aid funds that were

[42:21] deducted, you can see Anchorage is on

[42:23] there about 6.6 million.

[42:26] um that's how much they deduct from us

[42:28] and this is all the districts again. And

[42:30] then if they were to take that 81

[42:32] million that they would have to give

[42:33] back to districts and say now this

[42:35] formula is shortf funded and prorate

[42:37] that out based on it's essentially our

[42:39] adjusted average daily membership. Then

[42:42] that prrated funding reduction would be

[42:43] there. So you see the addition of 81

[42:46] million and then subtraction of 81

[42:48] million and then how it affects each

[42:49] district. So for Anchorage we they give

[42:52] us the

[42:53] 6.6 6.6 6 million back for what they've

[42:56] deducted. But then if we prorrate out

[42:58] that 81 million, our share of it's about

[43:00] 22.5 million. So a net decrease of

[43:03] nearly 16 million. Um so that's just the

[43:08] problem with the disparity test. We'll

[43:09] get into the problems with the local

[43:12] contribution limitation here shortly,

[43:14] but really just how this affects. And so

[43:16] there's going to be this huge shift in

[43:18] where the money goes. Same pot of money,

[43:21] but but who gets it changes

[43:22] dramatically. you'd see a net island

[43:24] getting a 535% increase in their state

[43:27] funding.

[43:29] Um, further putting this formula more

[43:32] out of uh balance. I think, you know, if

[43:34] this happens and if they don't pass that

[43:36] disparity test ultimately or they lose

[43:38] the appeal, then the states could may

[43:40] have to come back and try to rewrite

[43:42] that foundation formula pretty

[43:44] quickly. That's my read on it.

[43:47] Member Donley, I just think it's

[43:49] important to point out that we're the

[43:51] only state that is required to comply

[43:54] with this disparity test because we're

[43:56] the only state that doesn't pass through

[43:58] these federal funds to the districts.

[44:00] Might clip, that's correct. We're the

[44:02] only state that still uses this federal

[44:04] impact a disparity test as a mechanism

[44:06] to reduce state funding. Every other

[44:08] state's gone away with it. I think

[44:10] that's probably the feds probably have

[44:12] some

[44:14] um desire to offload the program and get

[44:17] rid of Alaska, too.

[44:19] So, member Martinez,

[44:22] thank you. Uh just a question

[44:25] about shifting populations of student

[44:28] sizes across these various jurisdictions

[44:30] and the impact to the dollars in those

[44:32] different places. Um, is that is that a factor at all when we we're talking

[44:39] about the cost that goes to these

[44:40] different jurisdictions that seem

[44:42] exceptionally high and

[44:44] disproportionately out of whack versus

[44:45] our needs?

[44:48] That happens some like especially when

[44:49] you get in the really small communities

[44:51] because there's a within the foundation

[44:52] formula there's a school size

[44:54] adjustment. So if you have 10 kids in a

[44:57] school, you get, you know, you know,

[45:00] multiples more money for having those 10

[45:02] kids for each kid than you would for a

[45:04] kid with a student with like 400

[45:07] um a school with 400 kids. So there's

[45:09] kind of this economies of scale that

[45:12] they try to pay for with the inverse

[45:14] essentially the the the smaller amount

[45:16] of population student wise you have

[45:19] let's say from economic displacement

[45:21] from a rural

[45:23] community as they shrink in student size

[45:26] the cost for

[45:28] running the buildings and everything

[45:30] else still stays the the same. So the

[45:34] dollars now go higher proportionate to

[45:36] the amount of students even if they're

[45:38] lower amounts. So they get more money

[45:39] essentially. They wouldn't get more

[45:41] money, but they would get the same

[45:43] amount of money. Not quite. It's not. So

[45:45] it's kind of a sliding scale. So they'll

[45:47] get a little they would get a little bit

[45:49] less for having less students. You don't

[45:51] ever get more for having less students,

[45:53] but that impact is sheltered through

[45:56] getting a little bit more for each

[45:58] student the fewer students you have in

[45:59] each school. Thank you.

[46:03] Member Baldwin Day. I I just want to

[46:05] clarify what I think I heard member

[46:07] Donley say, which was we're the only

[46:09] state that still uses this test, this

[46:11] formula, because we are the only state

[46:14] that does not drop federal funding

[46:17] directly into communities. Did I hear

[46:19] that correctly?

[46:22] Um, yeah, I think they probably all

[46:25] changed their formulas around too when

[46:27] they're to to make that fit if they were

[46:29] have operating under kind of these same

[46:31] conditions before. But all the states

[46:33] have unique for the funding formula. So

[46:35] I can't say for sure what they did to

[46:37] address the issue to get when they got

[46:39] rid of it.

[46:41] Member Holland, I was just going to add

[46:44] that, you know, we're we're in a state

[46:46] where constitutionally the state is

[46:47] responsible for education

[46:50] funding, but a big chunk of the state

[46:53] doesn't contribute locally in a way that

[46:56] Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juno,

[46:58] um, and and other localities do. and

[47:01] you're required to

[47:04] um but in addition this this sort of

[47:07] comes on top of all that just

[47:10] uh it's it's frustrating to see the

[47:13] state do what they're

[47:17] doing. So that's our the disparity test

[47:20] and then kind of the implications of

[47:21] failing the disparity test. Um, next we

[47:25] want to get into the changing in the

[47:26] local contribution limits that was

[47:28] proposed to the state board on Tuesday

[47:30] and

[47:31] Wednesday. Um, and the state attempted

[47:33] to use that failure of the impact a

[47:35] disparity test to try and change the

[47:37] local contribution regulations through

[47:39] an emergency action.

[47:42] Um, this data or had been discussing

[47:45] this for probably a couple years now

[47:46] wanting to change these local the

[47:48] regulations surrounding that. assure

[47:50] districts we'd have plenty of time and

[47:52] implement around in

[47:54] FY27. Monday morning I went and looked

[47:56] at the state board of education's um

[47:59] just to see when the meeting was. Never

[48:01] looked at an agenda before for the state

[48:03] board. It's generally not finance stuff.

[48:05] Just happened to get on there Monday

[48:06] morning and look at the agenda and it

[48:08] had the emergency order for or emergency

[48:10] regulation changes for local

[48:12] contributions. That's going to have that

[48:13] could have significant impacts for all

[48:16] districts across the state. So, didn't

[48:18] have an advanced notice that that agenda

[48:20] item was out there. I don't know when it

[48:22] was actually posted to their website,

[48:23] but that first I saw of it was Monday

[48:25] morning. None of my colleagues across

[48:27] the state had seen it either. Um, and

[48:30] the intent of it was to go into effect

[48:32] on Wednesday after they voted on it for

[48:34] this fiscal year. So, these changes

[48:35] would have gone to effect. Um, so we

[48:38] found out about it Monday morning. By

[48:40] Monday around I think 12 or 1, the state

[48:43] had published a new version that said

[48:45] they would go out for their normal

[48:46] 30-day comment period. And then by 4:30,

[48:49] I believe the superintendents got an

[48:50] email saying no, it's back to an

[48:52] emergency. Um, so in your packet, you do

[48:54] have there the state's rationale for it

[48:57] being an emergency. Um, if you want to

[48:59] read through it, but ultimately the

[49:01] state board voted to go through the

[49:03] normal process with the 30-day uh period

[49:06] as well. But if I could just add,

[49:09] somebody thought, because we just spent

[49:11] 40 minutes talking about a highly

[49:13] technical topic, somebody thought it was

[49:16] a good idea to push this through without

[49:19] people at this table knowing this

[49:21] situation, without people in every

[49:23] single one of our communities about this

[49:25] situation. So, I just want to put that

[49:27] out there on the record.

[49:31] Well, and I guess just to add

[49:34] clarity, which I think is appropriate

[49:36] and fair for transparency purposes, the

[49:38] very least our Department of Education

[49:40] and Early Development Commissioner was

[49:42] one of those people. So, I think it's

[49:44] okay to to name that public process um

[49:46] as inadequate as it was. Thank you.

[49:50] Right. So, this will get us I mean, and

[49:52] these limits would have had some really

[49:54] farreaching implications for us. um it

[49:57] would have limited the additional

[49:58] contribution that the city's able to

[50:00] give us for transportation and prek

[50:01] funding. That's about a $15 million

[50:03] impact for next year. And then there's a

[50:06] whole host of unknown limitations. It's

[50:08] based on vague language changes that are

[50:10] was in their proposed regulations.

[50:14] Mr. We have a question from Vice Chair

[50:16] Raleigh. Thanks. Um yeah, I was trying

[50:18] to remember kind of the list of things

[50:21] that this would include because it's out

[50:22] my understanding is it's outside of

[50:24] instruction time generally. So prek

[50:26] because it's not K12. I know that's

[50:28] about $2 million in our alcohol tax

[50:30] funding. So these aren't all even all

[50:31] property taxes. It's other things. But

[50:33] my question is on school resource

[50:35] officers because I know that is

[50:36] something that periodically becomes a

[50:38] fight. But I know that that is another

[50:40] contribution. I'm wondering about how

[50:41] much that is and is this within the

[50:43] known issue or is it in this kind of

[50:45] unknown limitations area? So the SRO's

[50:49] are definitely kind of in an unknown

[50:51] situation. I mean we've always taken the

[50:53] view that they're doing police work in

[50:54] our schools. They're not doing any sort

[50:57] of instructional work there. That's do

[50:58] they're actually doing police services.

[51:00] Um if at least you know some sort of

[51:03] community service there, not related to

[51:05] the to the school. I think I want to say

[51:08] probably maybe four or $4.5 million

[51:10] cost. I don't know. I mean the city pays

[51:12] that bill. So you guys just provide the resources officers to us when

[51:16] they're staffed.

[51:17] Um but it would be if the state were to

[51:20] consider that as part of a local

[51:21] contribution then it becomes a pretty

[51:24] big another big hit to us. No followup

[51:26] for member Broly. Yeah. So just just

[51:28] play this out. I know this is um it's

[51:30] going through this process. If if it

[51:33] comes to pass that they do this kind of

[51:35] how how does this impact the budget? I

[51:37] mean it in in my mind it essentially

[51:39] means we're choosing SRO's or some of

[51:41] these teachers in general but kind of

[51:43] what what would be as you said 15

[51:46] million can you put some kind of scale

[51:48] on that like number of positions or or

[51:50] something like that? Sure. For $15

[51:53] million that's

[51:57] probably 120ish

[52:00] FTE.

[52:02] Um you know it's a few more kids in

[52:04] every classroom. It's but really and

[52:07] that's just kind of what we do know

[52:08] about. There's a whole host of unknowns

[52:10] and I kind of want to get into the

[52:11] actual language that that um that would

[52:15] trigger these unknowns and then the

[52:16] stuff we do know. Like the first part up

[52:19] here at the top, this is the language

[52:20] that they're proposing. Um adding a new

[52:23] section to read the local contribution

[52:26] limited to appropriations that are

[52:28] consistent with 20 USC 7713.

[52:32] um if you're not going to go read that,

[52:34] it does include transportation and food

[52:35] service as a cost that would be included

[52:38] in there, which right now we have that

[52:39] exclusion for

[52:41] transportation. So that and probably

[52:43] prek would be just by changing it and

[52:47] making it more consistent with the

[52:48] federal guidance for expenditures

[52:51] um would would limit us for collecting

[52:54] the transportation and prek outside the

[52:56] cap. Uh and those are kind of the known

[52:59] things based on that section. This

[53:00] bottom section is where the real

[53:02] unknowns get to. Uh they've removed the

[53:05] definition of appropriations to mean

[53:08] money appropriated to a district's

[53:09] operating fund by the city or bureau. So

[53:12] what essentially what happens is in

[53:14] state this is the the administrative

[53:16] code in state statute they have that it

[53:19] ties back to this. It ultimately goes

[53:22] back to a to reference a city or burough

[53:25] school district instead of a city or

[53:27] burrow providing the funds. So that

[53:28] school district probably makes it where

[53:31] any local contributions that districts

[53:34] get, not just from the city or bureau,

[53:36] would go into this overall cap that the

[53:39] district can collect from local sources.

[53:41] Um, we don't know exactly what would be

[53:44] included in that list. We have a list of

[53:46] some things that might be, but it

[53:47] sounded like the state would make

[53:48] one-off determinations for each district

[53:51] individually. Um, so really we wouldn't

[53:54] know until they would make a

[53:55] determination. We wouldn't have known

[53:57] until they made a

[53:59] determination. That's really important.

[54:01] We have no idea what the magnitude of

[54:03] this would have been. And if this would

[54:05] have passed on Monday, there would have

[54:06] been nothing we could do about it.

[54:09] Continue.

[54:11] Right. So that's the first thing that's

[54:13] more problematic is instead of defining

[54:14] that local contribution just from what

[54:16] comes to the city or burough um removing

[54:18] that definition. The second piece would

[54:20] be the value of inind services. And this

[54:23] would be more where you're speaking to

[54:24] the SRO's or something like that. But

[54:26] it's before it was narrowly defined as

[54:28] insurance, utilities, energy audits, and

[54:30] maintenance. Um, this would open it up

[54:32] to a whole host of other things that we

[54:35] do for with the city and the city does

[54:38] for us. Even sitting in this meeting is

[54:40] this would be would this be considered

[54:41] an inkind service? You guys coming here

[54:42] and giving guidance and us meeting? We

[54:44] don't know. That's that's a that becomes

[54:47] an issue.

[54:49] So some of the things that we receive

[54:50] outside those MUN

[54:52] appropriations, interest earnings,

[54:54] school fundraisers, food sales, activity

[54:56] fees, jury duty, PECARD rebates, any

[54:58] other local donations, PTA donations,

[55:01] any grants received for charter schools,

[55:03] even school volunteers. Would that be

[55:05] any sort of a service? We just don't

[55:07] know. And this is what's really

[55:08] concerning about the change in that

[55:10] language and how vague it is. And

[55:12] somebody thought it was a good idea to

[55:14] push this through without the public

[55:16] knowing what's going on.

[55:18] Quick question from member Hullman. And

[55:21] I was going to make the point I've

[55:22] always advocated that perhaps the city

[55:24] could provide pool time to us for swim

[55:26] classes just because I think as a

[55:29] community we all have an interest in our

[55:30] kids learning how to swim. Uh we had to

[55:33] cancel that about 10 years ago because

[55:35] it was the most expensive elective that

[55:37] we had. Um, but under this regulation,

[55:41] if you did that, we'd lose state

[55:43] funding. If you just provided a pool for

[55:46] us to hold instruction in it, it really

[55:49] hamstrings creativity or cooperation,

[55:52] you know, or or a willingness as a board

[55:55] and an assembly together to do something

[55:57] for the public good.

[56:02] And then for the ink kind district uh

[56:04] donations, we made a a short list there

[56:06] too of things we just think of off

[56:07] offhand with, you know, street

[56:08] maintenance leading to schools for snow

[56:10] plowing, uh the bus passes you provide

[56:12] our secondary students, guest

[56:14] instructors, if there's a health

[56:16] department employee that came and talked

[56:17] to a health class, would that be an

[56:19] inkind contribution that would lower the

[56:20] amount of cash the city could give us

[56:22] through their appropriations?

[56:24] um coordination with emergency

[56:26] operations and then use of municipal

[56:28] facilities or equipment. You know, we

[56:30] have stream right down the street that's

[56:32] going to be able to use Naka Valley Park

[56:34] in the Russian Jack Trail System. Um

[56:36] does that count? I mean, there's there's

[56:38] just so much unknown with the v how

[56:41] vague they wrote this language. Member

[56:43] of Baldwin.

[56:47] So, my my mind immediately goes to you

[56:50] know what's the intervention?

[56:52] um what's what is the what is the

[56:55] process by which we as a legislative

[56:58] body engage

[57:01] in appropriate and pointed push back.

[57:05] And remember there's two issues here. We

[57:07] have the technical issue of the impact

[57:09] aid, but I need to know who was that

[57:12] person that thought that this was okay

[57:15] to push forward without anybody knowing.

[57:17] So there's two problems we have to

[57:19] solve.

[57:22] Um, for Miss Baldwin Day's question,

[57:25] there's a 30-day comment period that

[57:27] will be to the state board. Um, and

[57:30] hopefully DED will be answering our

[57:32] questions as well. Um, so we're getting

[57:36] together a list of questions that we can

[57:37] ask deed of what these regulations mean.

[57:40] This is just our interpretation of it

[57:42] based on the vague language that we

[57:43] have. Um, so letters of support or you

[57:47] know against the the the changes from

[57:49] the assembly whether it's as a group or

[57:51] individuals I'm sure that would be

[57:53] appreciated but that's I think our

[57:55] mechanism at this point. Uh member

[57:57] Martinez thank you. I just wanted to put

[58:00] an additional layer on that uh

[58:04] who made this decision who looked the

[58:07] other

[58:08] way. What we do know is it wasn't a

[58:11] local decision. What we do know is that

[58:14] in a in a place where we think all

[58:16] politics is local and better decisions

[58:18] are made at a hyper local level, where

[58:20] the children are, where their district

[58:22] is, where the communities are, that's

[58:25] some anonymous to this point, faceless

[58:29] from my vantage point,

[58:31] bureaucratic entity, person far away

[58:35] from our community making decisions.

[58:37] That's what I hear here. And and I see

[58:39] and I hear theft through formula.

[58:42] And it's it's it's disconcerting at bare

[58:46] minimum and that's very diplomatic. I

[58:48] fully wholeheartedly support the stance

[58:51] of this school district to get to the

[58:54] bottom of these fundamental questions

[58:56] cuz I really appreciate the point that

[58:59] if you didn't catch it beforehand, we'd

[59:02] be just ringing the too late bell at

[59:05] this date. Thank you, Dr. Bryan.

[59:09] Thank you, Member Martinez. Member

[59:10] Lessons. Thank you. Just to ask for

[59:12] clarification, do we know whether that

[59:14] 30-day comment period officially opened

[59:16] yesterday as a result of the state

[59:19] board's decision? I mean, when when is

[59:22] our 30-day window open and closed? Do

[59:25] you know that yet? I don't know that

[59:28] it's opened yet. Um, but we're going to

[59:30] look into that and we'll get back to you

[59:32] to make sure you guys are on the same

[59:33] page, too. Thank you. And then this is

[59:35] just a a proposition. Um, would there be

[59:38] interest in our bodies creating a joint

[59:42] letter signed by any and all individuals

[59:47] uh within that 30-day period? Great. Um,

[59:51] I'd be happy to work

[59:53] collaboratively perhaps as we've done in

[59:55] previous joint resolutions

[59:58] with two or three members from each body

[1:00:01] if that's an appropriate

[1:00:04] um way to move forward.

[1:00:11] Um, we're going to go to Vice Chair

[1:00:13] Raleigh. Yeah, thank you. Um just for

[1:00:16] timing purposes I think um you know we

[1:00:18] generally as we take an action as a body

[1:00:21] through resolution um so unfortunately

[1:00:22] we can't do the thing where we just pass

[1:00:24] the letter around and everybody sign it

[1:00:26] um but we do have an opportunity

[1:00:28] especially given the timeliness of this

[1:00:30] um if folks are interested your two

[1:00:32] opportunities on our end uh other than a

[1:00:34] special meeting are Tuesday's June 10th

[1:00:36] meeting uh we can certainly lay

[1:00:38] something like this on the table if

[1:00:39] necessary as a resolution um the other

[1:00:41] opportunity would be our June 24th

[1:00:43] regular meeting uh which is still within

[1:00:45] that window and gives some more time for

[1:00:47] drafting. Um so I'm sorry I'm not going

[1:00:49] to personally volunteer to help with

[1:00:50] this but I know we it's in good hands

[1:00:52] but that's your options.

[1:00:55] We have member Silvers.

[1:00:59] I'm just going to be a little bit less

[1:01:02] diplomatic and um I'm going to say that

[1:01:04] this is deliberate because public

[1:01:06] schools are under fire by people who

[1:01:09] want them to fail. So, it's not that

[1:01:12] anybody thought this was a good idea.

[1:01:14] This was deliberate and we need to name

[1:01:19] that. Um, I'll just speaking for myself.

[1:01:23] I'm happy to coordinate with, you know,

[1:01:25] um, our treasurer, member lessons, uh,

[1:01:29] vice president Bellamy, and then, uh,

[1:01:30] the assembly leadership team to

[1:01:32] potentially draft something, um, and

[1:01:35] take it from there. Um but agreed uh

[1:01:38] sending a joint message together has

[1:01:41] value. Uh member Baldwin I am very happy

[1:01:44] to help draft

[1:01:49] member Donley. Thank you. Um and

[1:01:55] Andy, my understanding is the specific

[1:01:58] problem that the federal department of

[1:02:01] education identified was that some

[1:02:04] districts had taken transportation

[1:02:07] funding and transmuted those into

[1:02:11] general fund funding that when they had

[1:02:13] leftover transportation money and it

[1:02:16] seems like that was the only problem

[1:02:18] they identified as creating the

[1:02:20] disparity. So to fix that, you could

[1:02:24] narrowly craft a regulation that just

[1:02:26] prohibited districts from taking

[1:02:29] transportation leftover transportation

[1:02:31] funding and moving to their general

[1:02:33] funds. And that would seem to solve the

[1:02:35] federal concern without creating all

[1:02:38] this other problem.

[1:02:41] Yeah, that's that could potentially

[1:02:43] solve it too. But then I mean if you run

[1:02:44] into the issue of then accumulating big

[1:02:47] balances of fund balance, it's not

[1:02:49] really probably a good management

[1:02:51] strategy for them for those districts to

[1:02:53] have just this pool of money just keep

[1:02:55] growing if they're not spending it all.

[1:02:57] Um but going back to a reimburseable

[1:02:59] system where the state would pay for the

[1:03:02] cost of transportation 100% like they

[1:03:04] used to um just the actual cost that

[1:03:08] would have solved it as well. And that's

[1:03:10] probably what I would advocate for.

[1:03:14] have member Johnson. Yeah, thanks. I

[1:03:16] just also want to volunteer with assist

[1:03:17] with uh drafting a resolution.

[1:03:21] So, hearing member Baldwin Day, uh

[1:03:23] member Johnson, is there a third

[1:03:25] assembly member who's interested? Member

[1:03:27] Silver is great. And then from our side,

[1:03:30] um school board, any objection to

[1:03:31] myself, member lessons, and vice

[1:03:33] president

[1:03:33] Bellamy hearing and seeing none, I think

[1:03:36] we have six. Great.

[1:03:40] All right. So, I've boiled down my

[1:03:42] frustrating week into 45 minutes for you

[1:03:44] guys. And you have any other questions?

[1:03:47] We can certainly address them.

[1:03:54] Anything else on this item then before

[1:03:55] we move on? This I think is what I'm

[1:03:57] hearing. We're done with financial

[1:03:58] planning after this. Is this correct?

[1:03:59] Okay. Uh member lessons, I just could

[1:04:02] you just very briefly highlight what the

[1:04:06] next eight or 10 months looks like on

[1:04:08] our end from our budget preparation

[1:04:10] timeline.

[1:04:12] Outrage first.

[1:04:16] Once we're done with the outrage, um

[1:04:18] hopefully on by the 19th, we should have

[1:04:21] the actual amount of money known for

[1:04:23] next year. Uh that's when the governor's

[1:04:25] due date is for getting the vetos back.

[1:04:28] uh potentially, you know, depending on

[1:04:30] what happens, there is the potential for

[1:04:32] the legislature to come back and

[1:04:34] override at some point, but they'd have

[1:04:36] to call themselves back into session,

[1:04:37] which would be it's probably a difficult

[1:04:39] task. Um otherwise, they could

[1:04:41] potentially do it in January, but that

[1:04:44] would be, you know, well after the fact,

[1:04:46] well after we've had to start making

[1:04:47] adjustments to our own budgets, um based

[1:04:50] on any vetoed funding. Um, aside from

[1:04:53] that, we'll probably start in August

[1:04:55] again talking about what our actual

[1:04:57] deficit's going to be and then going

[1:04:58] through and um, I'd like to do more deep

[1:05:01] dives into like different areas of our

[1:05:03] budget. You know, we hear over and over

[1:05:04] that concern that administration is too

[1:05:07] high. I want to deep dive into some of

[1:05:08] those departments. Um, the ones I run

[1:05:10] have been cut massively over the last

[1:05:12] decade. So, I don't think that that's

[1:05:15] just to educate folks on what is

[1:05:17] administration, how we spend our money,

[1:05:19] uh to try to get some buy in from the

[1:05:20] public as we go ask for additional uh

[1:05:23] BSA money because, you know, as been

[1:05:25] stated, they took care of about 40% of

[1:05:27] the problem with

[1:05:28] HP57. Um even less so on transportation,

[1:05:32] but we we're going to have to get out

[1:05:34] and do some more advocacy this year.

[1:05:37] Have member Higgins. Yeah, I I

[1:05:39] appreciate the comment about motivation.

[1:05:41] Uh what the what the goal is a great

[1:05:43] deal. Uh and I still refer to 10 years

[1:05:46] ago when in Senator Dun Levy's office he

[1:05:48] told me its goal was to cut the ankle

[1:05:50] school district $10 million $100 million

[1:05:53] and because he supports private schools

[1:05:55] and home schools. Look at his motions in

[1:05:58] regards to trying to get um your charter

[1:06:01] schools under the state. He believes in

[1:06:02] providing funds with religious or

[1:06:05] private institutions. He supports that.

[1:06:08] um and then allowing districts in

[1:06:10] different locations that would be under

[1:06:11] his control to be able to operate in

[1:06:13] Anchorage. There's an awful lot out here

[1:06:16] and this is just consistent with that of

[1:06:18] switching away funds um uh from the

[1:06:21] public school system into private or or

[1:06:24] charter schools run like private schools

[1:06:26] and that's where my concerns at. So, I

[1:06:29] think motivation is the critical issue

[1:06:31] and look at all the different things

[1:06:33] that have been pushed out there by the

[1:06:35] governor. Uh, and when you put them all

[1:06:37] together and you see the listing, it's

[1:06:39] consistent and this is consistent with

[1:06:41] that. So, I'm u very happy with the

[1:06:44] superintendent taking a strong position

[1:06:46] on this and but I saw it throughout the

[1:06:48] whole state uh in opposition to this and

[1:06:51] I appreciate that as well. But uh I

[1:06:53] don't think there's any question in

[1:06:55] regards to motivation here. it is

[1:06:56] undermining public sector education and

[1:07:00] um exclusion. So you got your your

[1:07:03] charter schools being run like private

[1:07:04] schools if the state had control of it

[1:07:07] and then being able to operate

[1:07:08] throughout the whole state. Uh and so

[1:07:11] it's it's it's just totally undermining

[1:07:14] the public sector education system for

[1:07:16] kids that um would be left behind if if

[1:07:20] Governor Dunby had to do it. Now I'm

[1:07:22] going to say this, anything done by a

[1:07:24] commissioner or anyone else in the

[1:07:26] state, we've seen how controlling the

[1:07:28] state, the governor is is either done at

[1:07:30] his direction or with his consent. Uh so

[1:07:33] to we can look at the blame, we can

[1:07:36] place it every place else and who in

[1:07:37] that group did it, but it still falls

[1:07:40] back to the governor. He's the one that

[1:07:42] controls and directs people what they

[1:07:44] do. And if he doesn't do it, is he doing

[1:07:46] it by consent?

[1:07:48] Thank you, Member Higgins. Member

[1:07:49] Holland. Um, I just wanted to

[1:07:51] reemphasize something that

[1:07:52] Representative Holland made clear at uh

[1:07:55] a HWA meeting last night. The $700 BSA

[1:07:59] increase, which is historic, if it's

[1:08:02] fully funded in the budget bill means

[1:08:04] that we'll be funded next year at about

[1:08:06] the same level we are this year. And and

[1:08:09] the way this has all come about over the

[1:08:12] past decade or more, it sounds like a

[1:08:14] huge increase. and and it is to the BSA,

[1:08:18] but it actually sustains us at about

[1:08:21] where we are. So, if people see that we

[1:08:25] got a $700 per student increase and are

[1:08:27] waiting to see what great things we do

[1:08:28] with it, it it will be that we do about

[1:08:31] what we're doing this year and the class

[1:08:33] sizes stay about the same as they are

[1:08:35] this year, um it it brings it into line

[1:08:38] with what the one-time funding from

[1:08:41] various sources has been over the past

[1:08:44] decade or so. So it it it creates a

[1:08:47] public relations problem. Um and and we

[1:08:50] get to escape a little bit of it next

[1:08:52] year as we start to build our budget.

[1:08:54] We're we're not going to be starting

[1:08:56] from such a low number. Um which I think

[1:09:00] is what happened in December when the

[1:09:02] governor announced of course we'll fund

[1:09:03] education. We're going to fund the BSA.

[1:09:05] We always have. But the BSA was about

[1:09:08] 80% of our budget. Um this way it will

[1:09:11] come closer to being 100% of our budget.

[1:09:15] as we go forward in the next year. But I

[1:09:17] do hope everyone will keep that in mind

[1:09:19] as we plan for the fall. We're we're

[1:09:22] maintaining with with this historic

[1:09:24] increase, which doesn't make verbal

[1:09:27] sense to anybody. Thank you, Member

[1:09:29] Hollowman. We'll go to member Dunley.

[1:09:32] The fact that this disparity problem was

[1:09:35] caused by some districts having more

[1:09:37] transportation funding than they needed

[1:09:40] when this district is puts millions and

[1:09:43] millions of more dollars into

[1:09:44] transportation than the current formula

[1:09:47] of the state provides us really seems to

[1:09:50] indicate that formula is broken and it

[1:09:52] hasn't been updated in over a decade.

[1:09:55] And as an additional priority as a

[1:09:57] community, we ought to be demanding that

[1:09:59] there be a new uh analysis, a new study

[1:10:02] of what the appropriate formula should

[1:10:04] be in statute.

[1:10:09] Thank you, Member Donley. We'll go to

[1:10:10] Member Baldwin Day. Uh I think I I was

[1:10:13] thinking along the same lines as member

[1:10:15] Donley. There there needs to be a a

[1:10:17] longterm a long view fix to the the

[1:10:20] analysis that's done for the disparity

[1:10:22] test. That's very very clear. and and

[1:10:24] I'm not I'm not sure you know where the

[1:10:26] confluence is of the legislative work

[1:10:28] that would need to be done on our end

[1:10:30] and versus yours uh to to move on that

[1:10:33] issue and to make that happen but that

[1:10:35] seems very very salient for next session

[1:10:40] member lessons um two things one I

[1:10:43] wanted to point out that again in that

[1:10:44] joint resolution that both bodies passed

[1:10:46] we did talk about transportation funding

[1:10:49] and I don't remember the figure offhand

[1:10:51] but it was in the hundreds of dollars uh

[1:10:53] that we needed to uh bring it up to par

[1:10:56] for um I'd want to say the 21st century,

[1:11:00] but um we're we're well underway. Um and

[1:11:03] then the second thing I just, you know,

[1:11:04] to build off of what member Hollowman is

[1:11:06] saying, I think it's very true that we

[1:11:09] are going that a $700 BSA is um not so

[1:11:14] different from a $680 one-time dose uh

[1:11:18] that we've received for this current

[1:11:20] fiscal year. The big difference I just

[1:11:23] wanted to keep at the forefront of

[1:11:25] everyone's mind is that uh we have spent

[1:11:28] our fund balance down to this 5% level.

[1:11:33] We could have it up to a max of about

[1:11:36] 10%. Um 8% is our board policy board

[1:11:40] minimum but but we've we've gone for

[1:11:43] broke, right? There is nothing left in

[1:11:46] the reserves if there's an emergency.

[1:11:49] And that also means that we cannot tap

[1:11:53] that sort of hailmary cushion to help

[1:11:56] balance our budget next year, right?

[1:11:58] It's it's done. So this 7475 million

[1:12:02] deficit um that is real, that is big.

[1:12:06] And I think we talked about briefly in a

[1:12:08] finance committee meeting, you could

[1:12:09] close every single school, elementary

[1:12:12] school in the district to save money and

[1:12:14] still have a deficit left over.

[1:12:17] So, we are not going to be closing every

[1:12:20] single elementary school obviously, but

[1:12:22] just the scale, the magnitude of that

[1:12:24] deficit is u challenging at best to wrap

[1:12:28] your mind around.

[1:12:31] Thank you. And I think I can close out

[1:12:32] our conversation just by um expressing

[1:12:35] appreciation uh for our assembly um for

[1:12:38] your support on this matter. Um and then

[1:12:40] it sounds like we have a path forward on

[1:12:42] partnership to ensure that um the Alaska

[1:12:45] Department of Education Early

[1:12:46] Development as well as the state board

[1:12:47] of education pursues any potential

[1:12:49] amendment to regulations regarding local

[1:12:51] contributions, impact aid, and the

[1:12:53] federal disparity test through a

[1:12:55] competent legal and transparent process.

[1:12:57] Um that is a bar that they have failed

[1:12:59] to meet uh with in dramatic fashion thus

[1:13:02] far. Member, sorry, Mr. Ratliff, I had

[1:13:05] one quick followup with the amount of

[1:13:07] bond debt reimbursement that we have uh

[1:13:09] that's subject to the the state still

[1:13:12] having reimburseed. It was a little over

[1:13:14] 14 million. About 14.2 is what the

[1:13:16] maximum exposure would be if they were

[1:13:19] to veto the entire line item.

[1:13:23] All right, not seeing any other members

[1:13:25] in the queue. We will go to now that

[1:13:28] we've completed our item E um we will

[1:13:30] skip over F and G and move on to H other

[1:13:33] matters of mutual concern. Um under

[1:13:36] number one we havemies of Anchorage Dr.

[1:13:37] Bryant. Thank you Mr. President. So I'll

[1:13:40] give the team a moment to pull up the

[1:13:46] PowerPoint. So I'll go ahead and walk us

[1:13:48] through a few slides. So I do know that

[1:13:50] we have several new members here today.

[1:13:52] First of all, welcome. This is uh quite

[1:13:54] a time to be a public official in the

[1:13:56] Anchorage community. Um but I do want to

[1:13:58] remind everyone that the ASD board and I

[1:14:01] are laser focused on three goals. One's

[1:14:03] on reading, one's on math, and the third

[1:14:05] goal is on college career and life

[1:14:07] readiness. And here in ASD, we have a

[1:14:10] goal to increase our graduation rates

[1:14:11] from 80% to close to 90% over the next

[1:14:15] several years. And this is one strategy

[1:14:18] um that we want to move this work

[1:14:20] forward. With that said, um this is

[1:14:22] really a short update that I just wanted

[1:14:24] to um just clarify some misinformation

[1:14:26] and hopefully get this group excited um

[1:14:29] that uh one this is going to help us

[1:14:31] increase the number of kids that

[1:14:32] graduate um from you know college or the

[1:14:36] number of students that are in

[1:14:37] incredible careers here in the Anchorage

[1:14:39] community or beyond. Um that's what this

[1:14:42] is about. And if there's one thing I

[1:14:44] want you to remember aboutmies and how

[1:14:46] it's going down right now is that uh

[1:14:48] we're going to go slow to go far. I I

[1:14:50] think that there was a lot of

[1:14:51] consternation, a lot of thoughts um

[1:14:54] about the the program, a lot of

[1:14:55] questions and I think that those

[1:14:56] questions were good and I want to spend

[1:14:58] the next few years really trying to

[1:15:00] understand what are the concerns and

[1:15:02] what are ways that this program can

[1:15:03] evolve to meet the needs of Anchorage

[1:15:05] today. Next slide, please. So, let's

[1:15:09] start off by looking at a video that uh

[1:15:11] demonstrates all the success that we've

[1:15:12] achieved this year despite our smaller

[1:15:14] model.

[1:15:16] [Music]

[1:15:22] It's been over a year since we started

[1:15:24] this journey together to launch themies

[1:15:27] of Anchorage. We've convened, we've

[1:15:30] listened, we've imagined something

[1:15:34] better and built something

[1:15:37] bold. It's been a year of big questions,

[1:15:40] but even bigger possibilities.

[1:15:44] This year, students across the Anchorage

[1:15:46] School District engaged in nearly 1

[1:15:48] million career connected learning touch

[1:15:50] points through networking, mentoring,

[1:15:53] and hiring events, industry showcases,

[1:15:55] and

[1:15:59] more. As part of Freshman Academy, each

[1:16:02] ninth grader had the opportunity to tour

[1:16:04] a university

[1:16:06] campus and attend a career

[1:16:09] expo to meet face tof face with more

[1:16:12] than 100 Alaska businesses and

[1:16:16] employers. All before the start of

[1:16:18] sophomore

[1:16:22] year. We're already seeing

[1:16:25] progress with a 5% uptick in GPA among

[1:16:29] 9th graders.

[1:16:33] [Music]

[1:16:36] Next year, things really begin. Each

[1:16:39] comprehensive high school in the

[1:16:40] district will launch at least two career

[1:16:42] pathways from hospitality to biomed

[1:16:45] science, engineering to

[1:16:48] education. We're excited to bring these

[1:16:51] programs that are proven to increase

[1:16:52] engagement and graduation rates to every

[1:16:55] student in the

[1:16:57] district.

[1:16:59] Our students are discovering their

[1:17:02] passions and seeing what's possible for

[1:17:04] their

[1:17:05] futures right here in Alaska. Themies of

[1:17:08] Anchorage. It's been a year of momentum

[1:17:11] and we're just getting started. We're

[1:17:14] preparing students for college careers

[1:17:16] and life. Investing in our students

[1:17:19] today helps build the Alaska of

[1:17:21] tomorrow.

[1:17:23] [Music]

[1:17:30] I think this sounds like a very exciting

[1:17:32] [Music]

[1:17:37] initiative. Encore.

[1:17:39] Um, so let's go to the next

[1:17:42] slide because here's the thing. This is

[1:17:43] really exciting stuff, but I think

[1:17:44] people have really over complicated what

[1:17:46] the model is and what it isn't. So, let

[1:17:48] me just be very clear about what themies

[1:17:49] of Anchorage is. So, uh, in 9th grade,

[1:17:52] it's ASD's vision that every single

[1:17:54] freshman will be enrolling in a class

[1:17:56] called college career exploration with

[1:17:58] personal finance. Why? Because I think

[1:18:00] all of us have been tuning into

[1:18:01] legislative sessions for many, many

[1:18:03] years. And we know that uh, personal

[1:18:04] finance is a critical skill for students

[1:18:06] in ASD. Every single ninth grader is

[1:18:08] going to understand personal finance and

[1:18:10] we're going to make sure that they

[1:18:12] understand what are the great colleges

[1:18:13] out there all across the country. What

[1:18:15] are the options here at UAA? What's dual

[1:18:17] credit? What's an internship? um what

[1:18:19] are ways that I can engage in the

[1:18:21] workforce? I think it's important to

[1:18:23] remember that we serve primarily

[1:18:25] students of poverty here in ASD. So, we

[1:18:28] need to give them opportunities whether

[1:18:30] it's to go directly into college or

[1:18:31] whether it's to make sure that they have

[1:18:33] the technical skills they need to get a

[1:18:35] high demand high wage job here in

[1:18:37] Anchorage right now today. But when you

[1:18:39] look at this model, it's very simple. No

[1:18:41] one's being asked to take anything that

[1:18:43] they don't want to take. um aside from

[1:18:45] learning fundamentals of personal

[1:18:46] finance and some other common sense that

[1:18:48] I think every ninth grader in the

[1:18:50] district needs to know. Number two, um

[1:18:52] in 10th to 12th grade, all we're asking

[1:18:54] is for students to opt in, right? So

[1:18:56] they have their schedule and we want to

[1:18:58] make the pitch that um through this

[1:19:01] course um through that nth grade course,

[1:19:03] you gain the inspiration, right? You

[1:19:05] start thinking about, huh, like how much

[1:19:08] does a new car cost? What type of job do

[1:19:10] I need to have to get that new car? and

[1:19:12] they can use those skills and apply them

[1:19:14] to ways that they can contribute to the

[1:19:16] community, whether it's in healthcare,

[1:19:18] whether it's in um community engagement,

[1:19:20] whether it's in public service. You

[1:19:22] know, I'm really excited about this, but

[1:19:23] I want to be very clear that nobody is

[1:19:25] being asked to take anything that they

[1:19:26] don't want to. Um, what we're trying to

[1:19:28] do is offer students as many choices as

[1:19:30] possible because my vision is that every

[1:19:34] single student in ASD is going to

[1:19:36] graduate ready for colleges,

[1:19:37] universities, apprenticeships,

[1:19:39] enlistment into the military if that's

[1:19:41] their dream, and beyond. This is not a

[1:19:43] college versus career paradigm. I want

[1:19:46] to let the new members of the assembly

[1:19:48] know that I actually before becoming

[1:19:50] superintendent spent nearly a decade

[1:19:52] being a national expert on the topic of

[1:19:54] college career readiness. I'm very

[1:19:56] excited about this. I would not be

[1:19:58] putting my name behind it if I didn't

[1:19:59] truly believe that this is going to set

[1:20:02] more students up to be successful in

[1:20:04] colleges, careers, or whatever they want

[1:20:07] to do. That's what the academy is about.

[1:20:09] It's about taking those little steps

[1:20:12] because again, we have so many students

[1:20:14] who are in poverty and don't necessarily

[1:20:16] have access to the information that they

[1:20:17] need to be successful in college and

[1:20:20] beyond. So, I'm really passionate about

[1:20:22] this and again, we really pride

[1:20:24] ourselves on the diversity of course

[1:20:25] offerings that we have in ASD. We have

[1:20:27] advanced placement classes. We have

[1:20:29] incredible programs like the biomedical

[1:20:31] science program. We have so many

[1:20:34] opportunities that students may not even

[1:20:36] know where they're going to take that

[1:20:38] credential or that experience or that

[1:20:40] inspiration. And that's okay. That's

[1:20:42] called life readiness. You have options

[1:20:44] and you're going to pursue the option

[1:20:46] that's best for you. So, here's my north

[1:20:49] star on this initiative. The data for

[1:20:52] ASD, again, this is not some national

[1:20:53] statistic. This is about ASD students um

[1:20:57] who complete just two just two CT

[1:21:00] classes in the same area, they graduate

[1:21:02] at

[1:21:03] 98%. So, let me remind everyone that the

[1:21:06] graduation rates for all students in ASD

[1:21:08] is around 81%. If you really dig beneath

[1:21:11] the surface of that statistic, if you're

[1:21:13] a student of color in ASD, if you're a

[1:21:15] student who's from a low-income

[1:21:16] background, those graduation rates are

[1:21:18] in the 70s. Depending on what specific

[1:21:20] sub population we're looking at, those

[1:21:22] graduation rates could be in the 50s.

[1:21:25] So, the fact that 98% of ASD students

[1:21:28] that completed a CTE class graduate on

[1:21:30] time in four years, that's incredible.

[1:21:33] And I looked at the statistic on that

[1:21:35] 98% and you know half of those students

[1:21:37] are students uh who are low-income. So

[1:21:40] it's incredible. Do you know that the

[1:21:42] national rate for students who are

[1:21:44] low-income graduating from college is um

[1:21:47] in the single digits when you look at

[1:21:48] community colleges and sometimes it's in

[1:21:51] the low double digits when you look at

[1:21:52] four-year universities. And again, I

[1:21:54] happen to know this because I spent

[1:21:56] nearly a decade becoming a national

[1:21:58] expert in this topic um throughout the earlier part of my career. So, I'm

[1:22:02] really excited to bring this to light.

[1:22:04] So, the model is simple. People are

[1:22:06] opting in to courses that are available

[1:22:08] at their school, but here's where the

[1:22:09] business community gets involved. So,

[1:22:11] next slide,

[1:22:14] please. We're going so slow to go so far

[1:22:18] because we briefed everybody that there

[1:22:21] is no money in ASD. In fact, there are

[1:22:24] some people trying to pull some

[1:22:26] maneuvers to rob us of even more money.

[1:22:28] And despite every single headwind that's

[1:22:31] been faced by us, we've added 23 new

[1:22:33] pathways in ASD. Despite that, right, we

[1:22:36] were able to do that in a way that is

[1:22:38] essentially costneutral. And there may

[1:22:40] have been grants that were involved to

[1:22:42] make some of this programming move

[1:22:43] forward, but um I think that when our

[1:22:47] low-income students start graduating at

[1:22:49] rates of 90% and above, that investment

[1:22:52] is going to be worth it. So even today,

[1:22:55] even despite the deficit, even despite

[1:22:57] all the political maneuvers, we're going

[1:22:59] to have 59 pathways in CTE in the

[1:23:01] Anchorage School District next year. And

[1:23:02] I'm really proud of that because that

[1:23:04] was despite a lot of noise and a lot of

[1:23:06] misinformation that I am laser focused

[1:23:08] on correcting over the next 12 to 24

[1:23:10] months because the stakes are too high

[1:23:12] when we're looking at the graduation

[1:23:14] rates of students. And I know for a fact

[1:23:16] that if you're an ASD student that

[1:23:18] completes these CTE classes that you're

[1:23:21] going to graduate at 90%. Why would we

[1:23:23] not be investing in opportunities that

[1:23:25] really help our students succeed? Why am

[1:23:27] I not hearing from legislators and our

[1:23:29] commissioner and others about ways to

[1:23:31] invest in CT programs so we can continue

[1:23:33] to do programs like this? I'm so excited

[1:23:36] that we were able to just pull this off

[1:23:38] despite the $110 million deficit that

[1:23:40] we've been facing all year and we're

[1:23:42] going to keep on going. You can believe

[1:23:44] that. Next slide, please.

[1:23:48] So here are the fine details that

[1:23:51] frequently get misunderstood. So uh

[1:23:54] these are the ASDCTE pathways that we

[1:23:57] plan to offer for the 2526 school year.

[1:24:00] The very first thing I want to say as

[1:24:02] you look at this slide um is the next

[1:24:04] slide is about King because I want to

[1:24:06] make another thing really clear to the

[1:24:08] public, really clear to everybody in

[1:24:10] this room. I love the King High School

[1:24:12] program. I think it's one of the most

[1:24:14] successful programs that ASD has

[1:24:16] launched in its history. And the reason

[1:24:19] why academy is formed is because we want

[1:24:21] to take those best practices and put it

[1:24:23] in front of the kid who may want to just

[1:24:25] stay on the football team at East High

[1:24:28] School and have the opportunity to stay

[1:24:30] on the east side and take some classes

[1:24:32] at their school instead of going to King

[1:24:34] Techch. But you're also going to have

[1:24:35] some students that want to take

[1:24:36] advantages of the King Techch program

[1:24:38] and they want to really have a a

[1:24:41] citywide access point. No matter where

[1:24:43] they live, they'll have an opportunity

[1:24:45] to take really high impact programs no

[1:24:47] matter where they live. Somies and King

[1:24:50] High School go hand in hand. Let's go to

[1:24:52] the next slide, please. These are the

[1:24:54] King CTE programs of study um that were

[1:24:57] offered to students. Again, AOA and uh

[1:25:00] King go hand inand they complement each

[1:25:02] other. We have thousands of graduates

[1:25:04] every year in the Anchorage School

[1:25:06] District. There's so much CTE and

[1:25:08] college prep and dual credit and AP and

[1:25:10] international balorate to go around. I'm

[1:25:12] not worried about students having

[1:25:13] choice. I want to give them direction so

[1:25:15] they can get to the finish line at the

[1:25:17] end of the day. So these are the King

[1:25:18] Tech CTE programs. And again, this is

[1:25:21] accessible to everybody in the

[1:25:23] community. So, I really want to make

[1:25:24] sure that you all can help me champion

[1:25:26] this message to the public that all

[1:25:28] we're saying is that wow, if you want to

[1:25:30] take advantage of these programs that

[1:25:32] aren't at my school, I can probably

[1:25:34] arrange some transportation to get to

[1:25:35] King Tech. But if I want to stay on the

[1:25:37] East High School football team, I'm

[1:25:39] going to stay at my school and choose my

[1:25:40] pathway at my school. It's that simple.

[1:25:42] So, what I'm going to be doing over the

[1:25:44] next 12 to 24 months is hammering this

[1:25:46] message through to every single person

[1:25:48] because there is zero reason why every

[1:25:50] single person in ASD shouldn't be behind

[1:25:52] getting more kids exposed to dual

[1:25:54] credit, CTE, and beyond. I am so excited

[1:25:57] for this. Next slide,

[1:26:00] please. And thank you, a sincere thank

[1:26:03] you because we could not have pulled

[1:26:05] this off without the support of the

[1:26:07] mayor and the assembly. We can't afford

[1:26:10] the Denina Center and you all comp that

[1:26:12] for us so we could bring thousands of

[1:26:14] students. Thank you. Can you clap for

[1:26:16] that? Thousands of students got to

[1:26:19] experience careers. And here's the cool

[1:26:22] thing about the 9th grade career expo.

[1:26:25] Um we uh galvanized hundreds of school

[1:26:28] business partners across the city and

[1:26:31] they stepped up. They volunteered their

[1:26:33] time and a lot of you were there and a

[1:26:35] lot of you you know encouraged people to

[1:26:36] come. Um, member Wilson was instrumental

[1:26:39] in making sure that IBW and a lot of

[1:26:42] school business partners that she's on

[1:26:43] the board of were present here. Hundreds

[1:26:45] of expose are there. But here's the

[1:26:46] coolest part is that the career expo is

[1:26:49] geared towards students that um are in

[1:26:51] nth grade, right? Sometimes when you go

[1:26:52] to a job fair, career fair, it's geared

[1:26:54] towards people who are going into the

[1:26:56] workforce. But when I walked into the

[1:26:57] Dina Center that was caught by the

[1:26:59] assembly, I saw students that were in

[1:27:01] front of the the green screen. You know

[1:27:03] what I mean? Like where they're trying

[1:27:04] to pretend they're the weather person. I think that's so neat. And I got to see

[1:27:08] uh I'm thinking about Alaska Premier

[1:27:10] Auctions. I I got to see some students

[1:27:12] really learn what it means to be an

[1:27:14] auctioneer for the first time. I mean, I

[1:27:16] might have gotten um Jen Matoya and some

[1:27:18] other people, some future employees. I I

[1:27:20] think that's um a really cool thing. And

[1:27:22] I'm sure that there are students that

[1:27:24] were at that um career expo and saw the

[1:27:26] talented physicians and really saw their

[1:27:29] future in a medical school out of state

[1:27:31] so they can maybe one day come back and

[1:27:33] help contribute to the medical crisis in

[1:27:36] Alaska so we can have more doctors in

[1:27:38] our low-income and rural communities and

[1:27:40] make a difference. All that inspiration

[1:27:42] really starts for every single ninth

[1:27:44] grader through the freshman academy

[1:27:46] course that they'll take their nth grade

[1:27:47] year. That's the career expo. That's

[1:27:49] thanks to the city. I just really wanted

[1:27:51] to express my sentiment, but I also

[1:27:54] don't want to let people off the hook.

[1:27:55] I'm not sure if we'll be able to do this

[1:27:57] career expo again because I don't know

[1:27:59] if the Denina Center being comp will

[1:28:01] count towards this impact date or what

[1:28:03] have you. So, I just want you to take a

[1:28:05] moment to think about what it's like to

[1:28:06] be a superintendent in these crazy times

[1:28:08] because all I want to do is just talk

[1:28:11] about these programs and get kids into

[1:28:13] school. Um, but here I am having to look

[1:28:16] at statutes, you know, 44, 62, 250 to,

[1:28:20] you know, try to make a political point.

[1:28:21] But this is the work and this is why

[1:28:23] we're working so hard and this is what I

[1:28:25] need you to help me get the message

[1:28:26] across on this issue that we talked

[1:28:28] about this morning because again, I

[1:28:30] don't know if we can pull this off

[1:28:31] because the state hasn't told me if the

[1:28:33] city can even help me get the den center

[1:28:35] for free. They might want to deduct our

[1:28:37] funding instead. That's crazy to me. So,

[1:28:40] next slide. Dr. Brian, can I interrupt?

[1:28:41] Uh, sure. First to say agree. Second of

[1:28:43] all, Vice Chair Broly has a question or

[1:28:45] comment. Uh yeah, I also agree. And um I

[1:28:48] wanted to note that our next uh joint

[1:28:50] meeting is also Friday, September 26th.

[1:28:53] And so what a great thing that we could

[1:28:55] make uh potentially a school day where

[1:28:56] we have our meeting in the morning and

[1:28:58] then we all head over to the den center.

[1:29:00] So I will I'm putting a note on my

[1:29:01] calendar right now. Thanks. That's

[1:29:02] really cool. This has been the longest

[1:29:03] week for me and that really warms my

[1:29:06] heart. All right, so I think we have one

[1:29:08] more

[1:29:09] slide. Oh, that's the last slide. What

[1:29:11] questions can he answer? I think I saw

[1:29:13] um member Higgins and then we'll go to

[1:29:15] members first. Yeah, I was going to

[1:29:17] mention to the superintendent, don't

[1:29:18] mention donations uh here a little bit

[1:29:21] with with everything going on with the

[1:29:23] state. I'll just mention this. I I I

[1:29:25] like the numbers. I'm I'm always big on

[1:29:27] numbers. So statistics out here,

[1:29:29] graduations and the like is something I

[1:29:31] always like to hear. The biggest

[1:29:33] challenge from my standpoint in

[1:29:35] supporting this is really trying to

[1:29:37] expand it to seven or eight classes

[1:29:39] because there's so many optional

[1:29:40] programs and then having enough teachers

[1:29:43] to do it. When you lose a teacher, you

[1:29:45] lose what they teach. You need to have

[1:29:46] other supports out there. And when you

[1:29:49] go from six to seven classes or six to

[1:29:51] eight, that's a third more students

[1:29:54] number of students taking classes. and

[1:29:57] we we're losing teachers and we're not

[1:29:59] getting them refilled and we're running

[1:30:01] into that type of nightmare. So, I

[1:30:03] support moving forward with this. I just

[1:30:05] want to be out there. We're being hurt

[1:30:07] by the state with funding when we can't

[1:30:10] fill these teacher jobs when they're

[1:30:12] losing them and they're not being

[1:30:13] replaced trying to retain them. I know

[1:30:15] we got a committee that's looked at the

[1:30:17] retention issue because that impacts us

[1:30:20] quite a bit when you have high turnover

[1:30:21] in the first five years, but we really

[1:30:24] um just laying that out. I ideally I

[1:30:28] wish we could support the seven and

[1:30:30] eight schedule, but you got to have more

[1:30:32] teachers and we just can't seem to we're

[1:30:35] going to have a nightmare with that with

[1:30:37] our salaries behind and no defined

[1:30:39] benefit, which the state continues to

[1:30:41] oppose. the only state in the country

[1:30:43] without defined benefit option for

[1:30:45] teachers. Another detriment that's

[1:30:48] coming directly from the state with

[1:30:50] opposition that way and that's and that

[1:30:52] would make a difference right there for

[1:30:53] low cost.

[1:30:56] Go to member Baldwin Day.

[1:30:59] Yeah, thank you. Um I would I would just

[1:31:02] love to get um this PowerPoint if

[1:31:05] possible. Yeah, I' I'd love to be able

[1:31:07] to dig into especially the slide of uh

[1:31:10] what's going to be offered at which

[1:31:11] schools. That'd be really fascinating to

[1:31:13] take a closer look. Thank you. Thank

[1:31:15] you. We'll go to member Silvers.

[1:31:19] Um yeah, I have a question. You said

[1:31:20] that um some of the career pathways have

[1:31:22] been paid for by grants. Um and my

[1:31:25] question is would those grants also be

[1:31:27] under threat um by these new proposed

[1:31:30] regulations? It's possible, but here's

[1:31:32] the way that I think about it. Member

[1:31:34] Silvers, we can't tell our students that

[1:31:36] I I'm sorry. The the state is trying to

[1:31:38] take $18 million from us. This is just

[1:31:40] the wrong time to pursue our goals and

[1:31:41] guard rails. I need to make sure that

[1:31:43] our eye is focused on improving student

[1:31:45] outcomes no matter what. And yet, there

[1:31:47] are some funds that are being funded by

[1:31:49] federal impact aid. We did receive a

[1:31:50] grant from the federal government. And

[1:31:52] you need to understand that I 24 hours a

[1:31:55] day constantly under fear that some sort

[1:31:58] of grant's going to be pulled or some

[1:31:59] sort of maneuver is going to be pulled

[1:32:00] or some sort of rug's going to be pulled

[1:32:02] from under me. So, I wish that I could

[1:32:04] tell you exactly what I'll do when

[1:32:05] there's a crisis, but what I want to

[1:32:06] communicate to you right now is I know

[1:32:08] the crisis are coming and I'm the guy

[1:32:09] you want to have in a crisis.

[1:32:12] Uh, member Vice President Bellamy. Yes.

[1:32:15] Thank you. Um, Dr. Bryant, thank you for

[1:32:18] uh doing the overview for the

[1:32:21] uhmies. Uh, we we really need to be

[1:32:24] crystal clear in our in our uh messaging

[1:32:27] what it is and what it's not. uh there

[1:32:30] still are parents and community members

[1:32:32] who see them

[1:32:36] as I don't know some kind of tracking

[1:32:38] system. It is not that it is a system to

[1:32:41] create opportunities.

[1:32:43] Uh it is not every kid won't want to

[1:32:47] um it won't fit every single kid but

[1:32:51] when we look at the statistics you've

[1:32:53] got

[1:32:54] like you know only 30% of our kids

[1:32:57] really go on to college what happens to

[1:33:00] the other

[1:33:01] 60%. We want them to be life and career

[1:33:04] ready too life college and career ready

[1:33:06] as well. And so we are, if we believe, I

[1:33:11] think we do, every kid, every day, no

[1:33:14] matter what it takes, we've got to

[1:33:17] create these opportunities for all kids.

[1:33:20] And I think um, you know, my own

[1:33:23] personal story really started with a

[1:33:28] program called DECA. I would never have

[1:33:30] even thought about going to college. I

[1:33:32] never would have I because I never would

[1:33:34] have thought I had any kind of skill

[1:33:36] except I learned how to do something and and I found I was good at it and it

[1:33:43] paid for me to go to college. It helped

[1:33:45] me to be where I am today. So anyway, I am 100% behind themies. I just think

[1:33:51] we need to make sure that we are clear

[1:33:55] and we are that you know it's not

[1:33:58] graduation or themies. It's not college

[1:34:02] or, you know, or or an apprenticeship.

[1:34:05] It can be both or all of the above. And

[1:34:09] then parents get to choose the path, the

[1:34:11] ultimate path for their kids. But we've

[1:34:13] got to look out for all kids. Thank you.

[1:34:16] Vice President Bill Bellamy.

[1:34:18] Um, flagging two things. First, uh, the

[1:34:21] slideshow for the AOA presentation is

[1:34:24] attached to our agenda today on board

[1:34:25] docs. Um, and then following up on Vice

[1:34:29] Chair Broly's comment, sounds like that

[1:34:31] we have a potential um, collaborative

[1:34:33] time that can occur after our next joint

[1:34:34] meeting in the fall, a field trip of

[1:34:36] sorts to staple on. Uh, we can

[1:34:38] potentially take up a good chunk of your day if you'd like. So, we'll

[1:34:41] examine how we can do that and get an

[1:34:43] invite

[1:34:47] out. With that said, if there's no other

[1:34:50] comments regarding uh, H1M of Anchorage,

[1:34:53] President Jacobs, I I had my hand up. I

[1:34:56] wasn't sure if you caught that. My

[1:34:57] apologies. Thank you, Member Wilson. The

[1:34:59] floor is yours. Awesome. Um I just

[1:35:02] wanted to kind of elaborate a little bit

[1:35:05] on on what um member Bellamy was stating

[1:35:08] in that the academyy's programs aren't

[1:35:13] just for students that don't want to go

[1:35:16] to college. Just like King Tech is not

[1:35:18] just for students that don't want to go

[1:35:20] to college. you you look at the

[1:35:22] biomedical program at at Service High

[1:35:24] School, most of those students are

[1:35:27] tracking to go into a healthc care field

[1:35:29] that would take a would need a

[1:35:31] post-secary education. Um whether it be

[1:35:35] a certificate, an AA, a BA or a

[1:35:38] doctorates. Um you look at the programs

[1:35:41] at King Tech and they do an amazing job

[1:35:45] incorporating the Alaska Middle College

[1:35:47] with the students at King Tech. So, some

[1:35:50] of those students are taking the trades

[1:35:52] program um that's available, but they're

[1:35:55] also taking classes at UAA. So, there's

[1:35:58] this great combination. There's there's

[1:36:00] no the the intention is to is to provide

[1:36:04] limitless opportunities for our students

[1:36:07] but to provide the exposure is is

[1:36:10] incredibly important because many of our

[1:36:12] students are not exposed

[1:36:14] to different programs whether whether it

[1:36:17] be trades or college or whatever

[1:36:21] programs be you know being an

[1:36:22] aesthetician or whatever they choose. Um

[1:36:26] but I I just I think there is I' I've

[1:36:28] heard the same kind of confusion from

[1:36:30] our our families from our community

[1:36:32] members um that that it is that the

[1:36:37] themies are focused on students who are

[1:36:39] not choosing to go to college and that

[1:36:40] is by no means the case that it's really

[1:36:43] focused on expanding their opportunities

[1:36:45] and expanding their exposure. Um, so I

[1:36:48] just I I appreciate that that's being

[1:36:51] said more and said more loudly and our

[1:36:54] uh our business people have been our

[1:36:57] business community has been wonderful

[1:36:59] about um being involved in this process

[1:37:02] which is amazing because those are more

[1:37:04] opportunities for our kids and more

[1:37:05] connections for our kids in our

[1:37:07] community. So it's I I I do believe that

[1:37:11] themies is just trying to bring a um a a

[1:37:17] louder a a larger platform to some of

[1:37:20] the programs that the the school

[1:37:22] district has had for many years and h

[1:37:25] the community didn't realize that that

[1:37:27] is uh a program that exists and many of

[1:37:30] our students maybe didn't know some of

[1:37:31] the programs that exist. So, it it's

[1:37:34] incredibly important that all of our

[1:37:36] kids know what opportunities are out

[1:37:37] there and the engagement with our

[1:37:39] business community continue to grow. Um,

[1:37:41] I did want to ask a quick question to

[1:37:44] Dr. Bryant. Um or maybe a comment more

[1:37:46] than a question. Uh because there there

[1:37:49] is going to be a change in leadership at

[1:37:50] King Tech. And so um maybe share about

[1:37:55] that process. So the community

[1:37:56] understands that there is um going to be

[1:37:59] a change in leadership, but the as you

[1:38:03] stated um earlier, your excitement about

[1:38:05] the programs that exist at King Tech

[1:38:08] will continue to exist. Um so if you

[1:38:10] could elaborate a little bit on that,

[1:38:12] that'd be great.

[1:38:13] Yeah, thank you, Member Wilson. So,

[1:38:15] we're in the advanced stages of

[1:38:16] finalizing the the who will be selected

[1:38:19] for King High School. I'm so excited

[1:38:20] about it. What I can share about it

[1:38:22] right now is I've been telling every

[1:38:24] finalist that I've personally

[1:38:25] interviewed myself, my priority is to

[1:38:28] expand the number of kids who are in

[1:38:29] King Tech. Um, it's not lost on me that

[1:38:32] there are a lot of teachers out there

[1:38:33] that may be, you know, reading things

[1:38:34] online or on Twitter or maybe, you know,

[1:38:36] phoning a friend, but I'm going to make

[1:38:38] sure that they hear from me. I want to

[1:38:40] invest in King. I want more students

[1:38:42] enrolled in that school. I want a vision

[1:38:44] for more full-time kids in King, too.

[1:38:46] You know, I had heard a stat from, I

[1:38:47] believe it was Andy Ratliff that if we

[1:38:50] add uh more full-time students into

[1:38:52] King, there's even a pathway for that

[1:38:54] program to be even more cost

[1:38:56] sustainable. So, I really want the

[1:38:57] public to understand I have immense

[1:38:59] urgency for financial reasons um you we

[1:39:02] can generate some dollars for the

[1:39:04] district, but also our board goals. So,

[1:39:06] I don't have any specifics to share as

[1:39:07] to who will be selected and why were

[1:39:09] they selected quite yet, but I've made

[1:39:10] it crystal clear they need to grow

[1:39:12] enrollment at that school because this

[1:39:13] is a board goal and I need more kids to

[1:39:15] graduate from high school in four years.

[1:39:20] Thank you, Member Wilson. We'll go to

[1:39:21] Vice Chair Broly. Yeah, thank you. Um,

[1:39:24] uh, very happy to see King continuing

[1:39:26] and have appreciated I think it's in

[1:39:28] December, uh, the hosting of kind of the

[1:39:31] update and and and, uh, getting served

[1:39:33] lunch by the students. So, thank you for

[1:39:34] that. Um but also I noted um in the

[1:39:37] programs that are on that list early

[1:39:39] childhood education and child care um

[1:39:42] things related to housing construction

[1:39:44] and then of course a lot of other

[1:39:45] workforce uh needs in our community. So

[1:39:47] I think there's a direct straight line

[1:39:49] with our assembly priorities as well and

[1:39:50] the municipalities priorities and making

[1:39:52] sure that we have folks who um can do

[1:39:54] those jobs and I think they're they are

[1:39:56] good jobs. So I hope that people pursue

[1:39:57] those careers. And if I may, um, you

[1:40:00] know, this is an initiative that can

[1:40:02] directly benefit ASD2. It's not lost in

[1:40:05] me that you can create CT pathways in

[1:40:07] the field of education. I think we need

[1:40:09] more amazing educators than ever before

[1:40:11] in this day and age. And given that ASD

[1:40:14] is one of the most diverse school

[1:40:16] systems in the country, I think it would

[1:40:18] be really great to accelerate the

[1:40:19] pipeline of students that are ready to

[1:40:21] give back and pay it forward. So, one of

[1:40:23] my priorities will be to expand the

[1:40:25] number of education pathways, too. We

[1:40:27] need to grow our own people. Whether

[1:40:28] they're the people building houses,

[1:40:30] whether they're the people in the

[1:40:31] hospitals, whether they're the teachers

[1:40:32] in your child's classroom, uh I really

[1:40:34] think that this could help our state a

[1:40:36] lot.

[1:40:38] Thank you. We'll go to member lessons.

[1:40:41] Um I wanted to say a couple of things

[1:40:43] that I've appreciated recently. One is

[1:40:46] uh that the administration has shared

[1:40:48] that it's going to really be working to

[1:40:50] engage with families uh more deeply in

[1:40:53] part of this going slow to go farther uh

[1:40:57] path and that we can also anticipate a

[1:41:01] revised master plan. There's been a lot

[1:41:03] of changes since June of uh just last

[1:41:06] year. Um and so that's something that is

[1:41:09] sounds like is also in the pipeline. Um,

[1:41:12] and I would just like to share, and I

[1:41:14] mentioned this the other day at our

[1:41:15] board meeting. Um, one of the wonderful

[1:41:17] things that I had heard for some time is

[1:41:19] that King has a summer program for

[1:41:21] students who are entering 9th grade. My

[1:41:24] own kiddo is there right now in the twoe

[1:41:27] session and uh, there's a new two-eek

[1:41:29] session coming next week and it's a

[1:41:31] strength. Um, so it's just it's a great

[1:41:33] deep dive into um some of the hands-on

[1:41:37] opportunities and they get to earn a

[1:41:39] half credit which is also fabulous. So

[1:41:41] it's something that I hope

[1:41:43] um can uh expand outward. Um, you know,

[1:41:48] that said, I did want to just share um,

[1:41:52] you know, I've had questions certainly

[1:41:55] about themies for for at different

[1:41:57] times. Um and I think that it has never

[1:42:00] been about tracking but about the

[1:42:02] question to which um I guess one

[1:42:05] question is you know how how do themies

[1:42:08] at the end of the day improve student

[1:42:11] graduation rates by helping students not

[1:42:14] fail courses if they can't read on grade

[1:42:17] level and if they can't do math on grade

[1:42:18] level. Um because to me that's one of

[1:42:21] the biggest reasons that kids don't

[1:42:23] graduate and I don't see that being

[1:42:25] fixed. I see engagement uh you know

[1:42:28] likely increasing but I don't see

[1:42:31] themies yet fixing a core problem of

[1:42:33] kids who are behind on grade level in

[1:42:37] those core

[1:42:38] skills member lessons if I may I think

[1:42:40] that's a great question to be direct

[1:42:42] themies are not designed to help every

[1:42:44] child learn to read in high school

[1:42:46] that's not what they're designed for but

[1:42:48] we can design our high schools to

[1:42:49] facilitate that change and I want

[1:42:51] there's another misconception that I

[1:42:52] want to be clear about because I was

[1:42:54] attempting to gather community feed

[1:42:55] feedback on changing the high school

[1:42:57] schedule. The reason why I wanted to

[1:42:59] change the high school schedule was so

[1:43:00] that I can give students more classes in

[1:43:02] their schedule so that if you're behind

[1:43:04] in, let's say, English one, you can take

[1:43:06] a remedial English course, it's maybe

[1:43:08] focused on more of the fundamentals that

[1:43:10] you might have missed in middle school.

[1:43:11] The same thing is directly applicable to

[1:43:13] math. This is a strategy that I saw

[1:43:15] personally when I was a high school

[1:43:17] teacher in a 612 school teaching math.

[1:43:20] Um, and there are various ways that you

[1:43:21] can structure with the seven period day

[1:43:23] because right now I think what the

[1:43:24] public needs to understand is if we want

[1:43:26] to keep the sixth period day, we can

[1:43:28] keep the sixth period day. But the

[1:43:30] problem is that there are a lot of

[1:43:31] students in other states that are taking

[1:43:33] seven and eight classes. They're able to

[1:43:35] take more advanced placement classes

[1:43:36] than our students in Alaska. They're

[1:43:38] able to take more dual credit. They have

[1:43:39] more room in their schedule to take

[1:43:41] internships. And my fundamental belief

[1:43:43] as an educator that really understands

[1:43:44] the nuts and bolts of master schedules

[1:43:46] and all of that thing, I actually think

[1:43:48] changing the schedule is the bigger

[1:43:49] lever to helping students to read than

[1:43:51] themies themselves. Because really what

[1:43:53] I'm trying to do is add more

[1:43:55] opportunities for students to have

[1:43:56] access to more incredible educators to

[1:43:59] get the remedial courses that they need.

[1:44:01] Because here's the thing. If you only

[1:44:02] have six classes and you failed, you

[1:44:05] know, let's say, you know, English from

[1:44:06] the year before, you only have so many

[1:44:09] blocks in your schedule to where you can

[1:44:11] even graduate on time within four years.

[1:44:13] So, I've paused that schedule

[1:44:16] conversation only because we can't

[1:44:18] afford it. But the minute that we can

[1:44:19] afford it, I want to talk about it

[1:44:21] again. I know that there's division on

[1:44:23] it and there's two sides to the issue,

[1:44:25] but we didn't even have the chance to

[1:44:27] have that debate because we were so

[1:44:29] short on money that we needed to make a

[1:44:31] decision based on money and not based on

[1:44:32] kit. So, I want to come back to that

[1:44:34] schedule conversation when we figure out

[1:44:36] this money situation.

[1:44:39] But member Silvers,

[1:44:42] just a side note before I ask my

[1:44:44] question. Um over 30 years ago, I took

[1:44:46] early childhood education and carpentry

[1:44:49] courses from it was called King Career

[1:44:50] Center back then. Um and I actually used

[1:44:53] those carpentry skills uh in my previous

[1:44:56] career as an environmental scientist. Um

[1:44:58] so it's just kind of a side note. My

[1:45:00] question is uh what is the graduation

[1:45:04] rate at King?

[1:45:09] I will ask my technical experts. I think

[1:45:12] the problem with King Tech is you have

[1:45:13] students enrolled in a home school and

[1:45:14] then also in King Tech part-time

[1:45:16] full-time. So, we may not have that, but

[1:45:18] I hope it's high. We don't have it. Can

[1:45:20] I get that back to you, Member Silvers?

[1:45:21] Thank you. Go to member McCormack. Thank

[1:45:25] you. Yeah, I just want to echo the same

[1:45:27] kind of concerns of that. The academy is

[1:45:30] great. Uh I did King Career Center as

[1:45:32] well uh when I went through ASD. Great

[1:45:35] program. Loved it. Uh had a lot of

[1:45:37] friends go through it. Uh but it seems

[1:45:39] like we're fa the city is facing the

[1:45:41] same problem that it seems like the

[1:45:42] Anchorage School District is which we

[1:45:43] keep trying to do nice and cool and

[1:45:45] great things but we are failing the core

[1:45:48] fundamental of our students can't read.

[1:45:51] They can't pass standardized math tests.

[1:45:53] Our proficiency rates have tanked over

[1:45:56] the last 10 years, 15 years since I

[1:45:58] graduated. The academy is great. It's

[1:46:00] cool. But we are still trending down on

[1:46:05] proficiency rates. I appreciate that

[1:46:07] comment, Member McCormack, but I want to

[1:46:09] make sure that the public understands

[1:46:11] that if we keep on doing the same thing

[1:46:12] over and over again, we're going to keep

[1:46:14] on getting the same and same results.

[1:46:16] And let me remind you that every year

[1:46:17] that passes by is not a status quo

[1:46:19] situation. It was just shared earlier

[1:46:20] today that, you know, a $700 BSA is

[1:46:23] essentially a funding cut from what it

[1:46:25] was the year before. So the reality is

[1:46:27] that every single year, school districts

[1:46:28] are operating with less and less. And frankly, there is no way that

[1:46:32] we can protect all of our programs if

[1:46:34] this funding situation does not turn

[1:46:35] around for FY27. ASD is looking at a $70

[1:46:39] million deficit. So there's no way to

[1:46:41] maintain every single program that every

[1:46:43] single community member loves that we're

[1:46:44] currently doing because we won't be able

[1:46:46] to afford them. So the thing aboutmies

[1:46:48] is not only is it linked to higher

[1:46:50] increases in graduation rates but it's

[1:46:52] actually one of the most coste effective

[1:46:53] interventions that the district can do

[1:46:55] because in the original model of themies

[1:46:57] the goal was for every single student to

[1:46:59] be participating in the program. That

[1:47:01] meant the cost per student would have

[1:47:02] you know for example a language

[1:47:04] immersion program is probably a couple

[1:47:06] extra thousand dollars per student.

[1:47:08] themmies would have been less than $100

[1:47:10] per student because the only cost would

[1:47:12] have been teachers. Really, the only

[1:47:13] cost to ASD was more teachers so we

[1:47:16] could have more classes offered so kids

[1:47:18] could have more opportunities to pass

[1:47:20] their classes. That's what got lost in

[1:47:21] the sauce and that's the part that I'm

[1:47:23] going to keep on hammering home. We

[1:47:25] really were on a path to transforming

[1:47:27] our system. We had to pause because

[1:47:29] there are some financial headwinds.

[1:47:31] there were some questions and unlike

[1:47:33] certain people when I sense that there

[1:47:35] are a lot of questions and

[1:47:36] misinformation I pause and I reach out

[1:47:38] to people and say hey let's cool down

[1:47:40] the temperature let's figure out what

[1:47:42] are your concerns about the schedule

[1:47:44] let's figure out what are your concerns

[1:47:45] about what program might be eliminated

[1:47:47] if we invest inmies but at the end of

[1:47:49] the day I need to be very clear that ASD

[1:47:53] students graduate at 96% when they take

[1:47:56] two of these career and technical

[1:47:58] education classes that's data that's

[1:48:00] local to ASD. Half of those students are

[1:48:03] low income. That's happening right now.

[1:48:05] Here's the crazy thing. Themies are not

[1:48:07] even fully built out. The only data that

[1:48:09] I'm sharing with you are the graduation

[1:48:11] rates based off of the classes that this

[1:48:14] most recent year seniors took. Imagine

[1:48:16] in 5 years when this program is fully

[1:48:19] built out and we go from having 500

[1:48:21] students graduate in CTE to close to

[1:48:23] 3,000 students graduating from high

[1:48:26] school in four years. that will

[1:48:27] literally transform our workforce

[1:48:30] because we'll have more students that

[1:48:31] have taken the courses, gotten the

[1:48:33] credential, have entered the workforce,

[1:48:35] and we'll just have so many

[1:48:36] opportunities to staff our hospitals,

[1:48:37] staff our schools, and to make our city

[1:48:39] a better place. So, I'm sorry if I get

[1:48:40] very passionate about this, but I have

[1:48:42] to again remind everyone that I've been

[1:48:44] in this field for a decade, and I know

[1:48:47] that we're on the right track to move

[1:48:49] things in the right direction if we make

[1:48:52] smart, coste effective academic

[1:48:54] interventions like themies.

[1:48:57] We'll go to member Hollow.

[1:48:59] Um, I do want to add when when we look

[1:49:02] at proficiency, there's always a

[1:49:03] tendency as adults to really try to

[1:49:07] narrow in and focus on those basics and

[1:49:09] drill remedial classes, more intensive

[1:49:13] reading lessons and whatnot. Um, as an

[1:49:16] educator, I've always said we're really

[1:49:18] not going to progress that way unless we

[1:49:20] can get kids into a mortgage and a truck

[1:49:22] payment that's over their head. And then

[1:49:25] you can threaten them with, you know,

[1:49:26] the loss of overtime and make them work

[1:49:28] like we do when when we're in that

[1:49:31] situation. Um, the truth is we have to

[1:49:34] make school more interesting. We we have

[1:49:36] to make kids want to be there. a a kid

[1:49:39] that realizes they can do something they

[1:49:41] want to do if they can read, they're

[1:49:43] going to learn to read. But a but a kid

[1:49:45] that really doesn't feel it because

[1:49:48] while everybody wants to read, not

[1:49:50] everybody wants to do the work it takes

[1:49:52] to read. But if they begin to realize

[1:49:55] that this is this is what what I've got

[1:49:58] to do to do the thing I want to do,

[1:50:00] that's when we really start to see kids

[1:50:03] take off. Um, so unfortunately I think

[1:50:06] when we narrow it, we're we're doing the

[1:50:08] adult thing of of where you got chores,

[1:50:12] you try to push everything else aside

[1:50:13] and just focus on that and grind through

[1:50:15] it, but they're not adults and they

[1:50:18] don't have that internal motivation. Um,

[1:50:21] they don't see the future. It's it's a

[1:50:24] abstraction to them. Um, and and that's

[1:50:28] why for a core group of students, you

[1:50:31] can just do basic classes. They're going

[1:50:32] to show up. They're going to study,

[1:50:33] they're going to learn, they're going to

[1:50:34] go off and do great things. But for the

[1:50:37] kids that aren't like that, you have to

[1:50:39] do something that's more timeconuming

[1:50:42] and frustrating and difficult to get

[1:50:44] them hooked and get them engaged and

[1:50:46] then they'll start rolling. The I had a

[1:50:50] bright kid and was a four or five year

[1:50:53] old. I was trying to teach him math and

[1:50:56] it really wasn't going very well. We

[1:50:58] started playing

[1:50:59] Monopoly. We never talked about math

[1:51:02] again.

[1:51:03] He knew I landed on his property. He

[1:51:05] knew exactly how much money I owed him.

[1:51:07] And and that's kind of the thing is like

[1:51:09] we we're giving up the time to play

[1:51:12] Monopoly in school in order to drill and drill just is a painful slog when

[1:51:20] you're trying to push spaghetti up a

[1:51:22] hill. So I uh the the answer

[1:51:25] unfortunately is more electives, more

[1:51:29] interesting things.

[1:51:31] Um, I see all the advantages the

[1:51:34] superintendent talks about from themies,

[1:51:36] but I don't want to shorten our periods.

[1:51:38] I want longer days. I would like the

[1:51:41] ability for students to be able to

[1:51:43] choose and say, "Well, actually, I need

[1:51:44] a seventh period, but we could still

[1:51:47] transport them home. We need more time

[1:51:50] with the students that aren't doing

[1:51:52] well." And ideally, the students that

[1:51:55] are doing well could be done and be off

[1:51:57] doing the other things they do because

[1:51:58] most of them are very busy with all

[1:52:00] kinds of cool stuff. But we're nowhere

[1:52:03] near the level of funding that would let

[1:52:05] us do something like that that I think

[1:52:07] would be a lot more creative, would let

[1:52:09] us engage the right way with with the

[1:52:12] students that need it in the way they

[1:52:13] need it. We're we're far from that. our decisions unfortunately really

[1:52:19] revolve around the institution staying

[1:52:21] within a budget staying within a lot of

[1:52:23] constraints. It's not what is really

[1:52:26] student centered at all unfortunately

[1:52:29] but you're you raised a valid point. Um

[1:52:33] the other thing I do want to say is when

[1:52:35] kids show up as not proficient on these

[1:52:37] tests, it doesn't mean they can't read

[1:52:39] at all. They're just not at the level

[1:52:42] that the cut score on that test. Um, and the Alaska standards are pretty

[1:52:50] high. Um, it's not a standard every kid

[1:52:52] will ever meet, but it's good to have

[1:52:56] high standards. So, there's sort of that

[1:52:58] dichotomy. Um, I think it was like webon

[1:53:00] that had the slogan. We'll have high

[1:53:02] standards and every kid will meet them.

[1:53:04] And that's not really, you know, that's

[1:53:07] faulty logic on that part of it. There's

[1:53:10] so much more we could do. Um, and

[1:53:12] unfortunately, a lot of what the board's

[1:53:14] had to spend time on is what can we cut

[1:53:17] that does the least damage to the

[1:53:19] smallest number of kids. And it's not

[1:53:21] innovative. It's not it's not exciting,

[1:53:24] but we want to be there.

[1:53:28] Thank you, Member Holland. I just wanted

[1:53:29] to note we have seven minutes left in

[1:53:31] our schedule time today and two agenda

[1:53:33] items as well as member comments. And

[1:53:35] so, I'm certainly not trying to curtail

[1:53:37] conversation. We gave a ton of time,

[1:53:39] rightfully so, to the budget um and

[1:53:41] financials talk. Um but wanted to flag

[1:53:43] that. With that said, is there a motion

[1:53:45] to extend by 10 minutes? I understand

[1:53:47] both the assembly and the board have

[1:53:48] extra meetings today, so I don't want to

[1:53:50] go much further. Move to extend 10

[1:53:52] minutes. Second. Made by member Higgins,

[1:53:56] seconded by member Silvers. Is there any

[1:53:57] opposition to extending our meeting

[1:53:59] until 12:10 p.m.?

[1:54:05] The question was, is there any

[1:54:06] opposition? Yeah. Yes.

[1:54:10] Uh so we'll vote then. Um I believe

[1:54:13] you'll have the votes to extend. Right.

[1:54:18] You do now. Yeah. So um Miss Sullivan,

[1:54:22] can we call a voice vote to extend until

[1:54:24] 12?

[1:54:32] Member Lessons.

[1:54:35] Yes. Member Wilson. Yes.

[1:54:40] Member Donley. Yes. Member Higgins. Yes.

[1:54:46] Member Bellamy is gone. And President

[1:54:49] Jacobs. Yes.

[1:54:53] Vice Chall. Thank you. Uh Madam Clerk,

[1:54:56] will you call the role for the assembly

[1:54:57] or call for votes?

[1:55:00] Member McCormack.

[1:55:03] No. Member Martinez, no.

[1:55:07] Member Baldwin Day, yes. Member Johnson,

[1:55:12] yes. Vice Chair Broly, yes. Member

[1:55:15] Silvers,

[1:55:16] yes. Member Rivera, yes. Member Girker,

[1:55:20] no.

[1:55:23] That

[1:55:25] fails. 5 to three.

[1:55:34] Can the clerk advise us what this means?

[1:55:36] We stop at 12

[1:55:39] through the chair. You'll have to give

[1:55:40] me a minute.

[1:55:43] A brief ed while we check procedure.

[1:57:02] point of information.

[1:57:04] Mr. About three and a half minutes just

[1:57:05] ticked off the clock. Agreed.

[1:57:09] Point well taken. Huh.

[1:57:17] through the chair. The clerk said it did

[1:57:19] not pass.

[1:57:21] So, uh, we will adjourn at 12. With that

[1:57:25] said, I see member Girker in the queue.

[1:57:28] Yeah, thank you. I just wanted to circle

[1:57:31] back to something Dr. Bryant you'd said,

[1:57:33] but I just wanted to give you a chance

[1:57:34] to maybe clarify. You said that this

[1:57:36] historic BSA increase was actually a

[1:57:39] cut. Can you Is that Is that correct?

[1:57:41] Did I hear that right?

[1:57:45] Yes. Uh I think functionally when

[1:57:46] inflation's 30% and the increase to the

[1:57:49] BSA is about you know less than 2% that

[1:57:51] would be a cut. That that's that was the

[1:57:53] rough math. But Mr. Ratliff, would you

[1:57:54] like to clarify the actual

[1:58:11] calculations? Uh, yeah. So, effectively

[1:58:15] going from a $680 BSA equivalent to a

[1:58:20] $700 BSA equivalent would provide about

[1:58:22] $1.4 4 million maybe in new revenue. Our

[1:58:26] inflation on a $630 million budget is

[1:58:29] going to be 18 to 20 25 million. I mean,

[1:58:33] so that's really where the cut is. If

[1:58:34] we're not getting enough new revenue to

[1:58:35] make up for that inflationary cost

[1:58:37] drivers of our salaries and benefits

[1:58:39] going up than it's in other contracts,

[1:58:41] utilities, then that's really where we

[1:58:43] have to start making cuts. And that's

[1:58:44] been happening year after year. And

[1:58:45] that's why our structural deficit has

[1:58:47] built up now to, you know, 110 $120

[1:58:50] million.

[1:58:52] Yeah, I guess I would just say that

[1:58:53] that's kind of an outrageous, you know,

[1:58:56] situation that we're in. And especially

[1:58:58] when you're talking to people, we just,

[1:59:00] you know, this this BSA increase is

[1:59:02] expensive on every single man, woman,

[1:59:04] and child in this state. And to hear

[1:59:06] this body say, "Well, it's not going to

[1:59:08] actually have any that much of a

[1:59:09] functional difference for us. Don't

[1:59:11] expect outcomes to improve. Don't expect

[1:59:13] any of this to improve." That's frankly

[1:59:15] outrageous and I find truly

[1:59:17] unacceptable. Thank you.

[1:59:20] Go to member hs. Thank you and I'll do

[1:59:22] it real quick. You made reference to

[1:59:24] outcomes and of course that's important

[1:59:25] and we heard it from the governor. We've

[1:59:27] had the pasm study out there showing the

[1:59:30] average class the classroom sizes in the

[1:59:32] majority of state and was considered

[1:59:33] adequate funding is 1 to 15 K through

[1:59:36] three and 1 to 25 above that. Uh and

[1:59:39] that's been accepted by court systems.

[1:59:41] We're over 30 in in the lower grades. Uh

[1:59:43] so we're twice the size and we've been

[1:59:45] increasing it in the last 10 years. And

[1:59:47] the governor's response is when the

[1:59:49] academics improve then we'll give you

[1:59:51] more money and allow to end up with

[1:59:53] growing even larger classroom sizes.

[1:59:56] When you look at the outcome for

[1:59:57] teachers and you look at where they

[1:59:59] start in in kindergarten so many

[2:00:01] academically not I they're not prepared

[2:00:03] for kindergarten over half of them and

[2:00:05] our academic growth between uh those

[2:00:08] first four years is puts us in a whole

[2:00:10] different category when you do a

[2:00:12] comparison. So I just want to make that

[2:00:14] point that inadequate funding does not

[2:00:16] address the academic issues that are out

[2:00:19] there. And in regards to the seventh

[2:00:20] eighth grade when that came up 20 years

[2:00:23] ago or 10 years ago that was an issue

[2:00:25] that was reviewed publicly and got to be

[2:00:27] an issue of of six to seven schedule and

[2:00:30] all the academics are positive. Member

[2:00:31] Higgins I'm going to have to interrupt

[2:00:33] you to say that we were adjourned. It's

[2:00:34] 12 pm. Thank you everyone.

2025/06/06 ASD School Board / Anchorage Assembly Joint Meeting

Transcript